The Role of Project Description in the Success of Sustainable Crowdfunding Projects

Abstract

Crowdfunding nowadays has become a significant source of financing for all those entrepreneurs who require funds to start their operations, specifically for social ventures. Furthermore, determining what factors decide whether a project will successfully raise funds is a very relevant question. Past literature has examined various factors that influence fundraising success. Of these factors, information efficiency is the determinant of successful fundraising due to precise project descriptions and effective message delivery. Despite this fact, few studies have investigated how such project descriptions affect the success of crowdfunding campaigns, specifically sustainable projects. The present study tries to fill this gap by examining the relation between the length and readability of the crowdfunding project descriptions and the success rate for sustainable projects in a reward-based model. For the analysis, data were obtained from Kickstarter, the largest crowdfunding platform in the world, with a sample of 12,613 projects, employing a multiple logistic regression model. The results show that the word count and readability of the project descriptions are positively related to crowdfunding success. Furthermore, the analysis shows that using more words related to SDG keywords results in positive fundraising. Such insights reflect that good project descriptions are important for crowdfunding success and, on the theoretical level, provide practical value for project owners.

1. Introduction

Social entrepreneurship is a creative way to address significant social challenges, but it often faces the hurdle of limited access to funding (Böckel et al., 2021). Social entrepreneurs frequently find it challenging to obtain financing from traditional sources like banks (Calic & Mosakowski, 2016; Hörisch & Tenner, 2020). Consequently, crowdfunding has become an important source of finance, offering an alternative path toward sustainable development (Calic & Mosakowski, 2016). It involves the founder soliciting small amounts of finances from many people over the Internet, bypassing traditional financial intermediaries (Mollick, 2014).

At present, it is expected that the global crowdfunding industry will have a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 15.86% for the years from 2022 to 2027 (Ndumbaro et al., 2023). By 2027, it is expected that the market will grow by USD 264.09 billion (Ndumbaro et al., 2023). As reported by Technavio (2022), the several factors contributing to this market growth include the use of social media as an effective and low-cost marketing tool, with comparatively more accessible funding compared to traditional funding channels, and a growing consumer base. However, within this broad market, more than 80% of crowdfunding campaigns have failed to gain 20% of their desired funding (Forbes & Schaefer, 2017), with only 45% of projects reaching their desired financial targets (Mollick, 2014). As a result, research into the factors behind successful fundraising has become a key area of research interest (Shneor & Vik, 2020).

Regarding the factors that determine the effectiveness of sustainable crowdfunding projects, a significant amount of academic literature investigates the contribution that the sustainability focus of such projects makes to their overall success (Hörisch & Tenner, 2020). An increasing body of literature focuses on communication, attributing to it the dynamism and innovativeness of sustainable crowdfunding campaigns; it is a factor highlighted by researchers in the field (Vismara, 2019).

Success in crowdfunding is mainly about communication; a well-articulated project description can effectively influence the decisions of potential supporters (Shneor & Vik, 2020). In the case of green crowdfunding, the project description is crucial because it directs them toward the relevant audience and helps secure the much-needed funds. Such clarity enables the intended investors to fully understand the project’s essence through a clear and unbiased presentation of its aim, aspirations, and expected outcomes. In the case of green initiatives, there is an evident rise in interest in the social and environmental implications of such projects—an area that is quite appealing to green investors who are willing to sacrifice short-term financial gains in the name of long-run sustainable returns (Lu et al., 2022).

In addition, a carefully constructed project description strengthens the legitimacy of the initiative by providing details on the administrative procedures and resource management strategies implemented, thereby promoting transparency and accountability. It alleviates any suspicions that potential donors may have by explaining the expected projects aimed at promoting sustainability, the potential risks involved, and the significant milestones necessary for the project’s success. It therefore presents the project description logically and compellingly and effectively sets a strong ground for potential donors, hence maximizing the success rate in the fundraising campaign (Liu et al., 2024).

According to Chan et al. (2021), project descriptions serve as stories that can reduce information gaps and establish trust among the backers. Although much significance has been attached to communication, very little, if any, research has documented the role of project descriptions in the success of sustainable crowdfunding campaigns (Zhou et al., 2018). This knowledge gap calls for further research. The present research investigates how project description details influence crowdfunding campaigns’ success. Data are analyzed from Kickstarter, which is currently the most popular crowdfunding platform in the world. The current research seeks to explore the specifications in project descriptions according to two main dimensions: readability and length. The first dimension relates to the amount of information delivered, and the second relates to the quality of the information delivered. The study generally hypothesizes a positive relationship between the quality of the project descriptions, the length thereof, and the respective crowdfunding success rates thereof. The study further shows that the greater the dominance in project descriptions by sustainability-related keywords the better the correlation with higher crowdfunding success rates. The findings have important implications for policy in enhancing the quality of project descriptions as a tool for enhancing the financing capacity of various projects. First, the study promotes changes in the length of project descriptions. Second, the use of informal and concise language may increase the readability of sustainable projects for investors, and hence the success of the projects. Finally, a focus on sustainability may allow easy access to capital for a greater variety of projects, and an increased frequency in sustainability-related keywords may greatly enhance fundraising success. The recommendations are geared towards financial sustainability in the crowdfunding sector and the creation of new sustainable businesses.

This paper is organized as follows: Section 2 reviews related literature concerning the impact of project description and sustainability in crowdfunding. Section 3 describes the sample and the methodology of the study. Section 4 discusses empirical results. Finally, Section 5 concludes with recommendations for future research.

2. Literature Review

2.1. Overview of Crowdfunding and Sustainability

Crowdfunding has three essential elements: people, projects, and online platforms (Jovanović, 2019). The people looking for financial support are called entrepreneurs or creators, and they present their projects to potential supporters. Those who provide financial support are called backers or “the crowd”. Depending on the crowdfunding model, these backers can act as agents, shareholders, or donors. People contribute with varied motivations, such as interest, enjoyment, curiosity, and altruism, which often make projects with social or environmental advantages much more attractive than other forms of funding (Forbes & Schaefer, 2017).

One of the crowdfunding essentials is a platform in the middle that links fund seekers to their prospective investors (Burkett, 2011). It provides essentials such as project presentation, fund management, communication enabling, information exchange, and operation management. The first ever platform for crowdfunding was ArtistShare, launched in 2001 to support artists seeking funds to finance a project in music (Deng et al., 2022). Since then, crowdfunding has been a developed means for entrepreneurs to secure funds for their projects.

Entrepreneurs often turn to crowdfunding to gain more money or cushion their financial base in business. Under microfinance, different kinds of crowdfunding appear to be preferred by entrepreneurs based on needs (Younkin & Kashkooli, 2016). The most common ones are donation-based, equity-based, lending-based, and reward-based crowdfunding, each offering contributors some specific advantages (Jovanović, 2019).

Donation-based crowdfunding primarily serves charitable or social initiatives. In this framework, individuals provide financial contributions without anticipating reciprocal benefits. Conversely, reward-based crowdfunding has gained significant popularity, wherein supporters receive a tangible reward in exchange for their contributions (Belleflamme et al., 2014; Jovanović, 2019).

Equity crowdfunding, also called crowd investing, allows people to purchase company shares; so, in exchange for their financial contribution, it will give them a small ownership interest. Lending crowdfunding, or peer-to-peer lending, involves a direct loan from investors, not banks. Repayment of these lenders carries interest (Hörisch & Tenner, 2020).

These types of crowdfunding mostly function through online platforms, making them easy to access and participate in from anywhere.

Specifically, two general models of reward-based crowdfunding are discussed: patronage and the pre-purchase/pre-order model (Tomczak & Brem, 2013). In the patronage model, the supporters contribute money and receive a gift or product in return (Tomczak & Brem, 2013). On the other hand, the pre-purchase model is when some contributors agree to buy the product before it is built at a discount (Tomczak & Brem, 2013). People back such campaigns not just because they share similar values but because they come with incentives. These incentives can take the shape of gifts or samples of the product. On a less material level, it can be a matter of getting their name in the movie’s credits or having input in developing the product. Entrepreneurs perceive these backers as early loyal customers by offering them decent pricing or special perks, effectively pre-selling products to these early customers. For example, transmitting funds to projects takes the ‘all-or-nothing’ model in which the money is only issued to projects that meet the projected financial goals. On the other hand, websites like IndieGogo and GoFundMe revolve around the ‘keep-it-all’ model: the project initiators get to keep the money despite the probability of meeting the stipulated goals. Therefore, this paper addresses one of the foremost crowdfunding websites in the world, which applies the ‘all-or-nothing’ model, known as Kickstarter (Allison et al., 2015; Colombo et al., 2015; Tomczak & Brem, 2013).

Crowdfunding is mainly used to finance new and innovative ideas (Lehner & Nicholls, 2017); however, it enables entrepreneurs to achieve other big goals. Companies like Coca-Cola, Motorola, and Procter & Gamble use this tool to validate their market studies by attaining genuine feedback and customer transactions (Liang et al., 2020). Crowdfunding campaigns are often advertised through social and traditional advertising, which significantly creates interest and excitement about new projects, particularly in their early stages (Brown et al., 2017; Hörisch, 2018). In addition, it is a method of market testing through which entrepreneurs can determine consumer desire for their products and further develop their product or service based on consumer response (Zhang & Tian, 2021). It carries financial risks, but there is potential to earn money and get exposure and for creators to learn (Forbes & Schaefer, 2017). Crowdfunding sites make money from successful projects using fees taken on transactions and through enhanced reputation in the field. Therefore, knowledge concerning factors influencing a successful crowdfunding campaign can support the participants in achieving their goals (Deng et al., 2022).

Crowdfunding is a necessary channel through which considerable funds are raised for initiatives for sustainability. It allows both individual and institutional investors to contribute to the financing of projects for the conservation of the environment and the development of local populations. The literature shows that scholarly investigation in the field is in the initial stages; however, it is rapidly developing and investigating the role played by crowdfunding in searching for sustainable development from multiple dimensions (Böckel et al., 2021).

Studies have recognized several key components that influence the effectiveness of crowdfunding campaigns for sustainability (Böckel et al., 2021; Gai et al., 2025). The determinants underlying such a phenomenon include the degree to which a specific initiative aligns with sustainable development goals, its effectiveness in addressing environmental and social impacts, and the extent to which such initiatives are supported by institutional trust. For instance, an analysis of 771 campaigns on platforms for crowdfunding in Italy between the years 2014 and 2021 found that campaigns with a focus on sustainability posted better performances, with such a finding supported through assessment from the economic sector and investor views with regard to environmental, social, and governance aspects (Gai et al., 2025).

In the last few years, there has been a remarkable surge in the platforms for crowdfunding sustainability projects, with unique features that improve the efficacy of their functioning. Such platforms address specific challenges in financing sustainability projects, including high transaction costs and the need for effective governance structures. Using blockchain technology, they create secure setups intended to discourage possible fraud and ensure high transparency levels. Theoretical conceptual frameworks put forward by scholars validate the viability of the use of blockchain-based decentralized co-governance structures in crowdfunding and thereby promote the use of a three-level community model in maintaining the integrity and fairness in the distribution of value (B. Chen et al., 2023).

Crowdfunding is a vital platform for raising funds for sustainability initiatives while building a dedicated following of supporters of positive environmental and social impacts. The success of the projects largely depends on numerous factors, including the extent to which the projects align with sustainability goals, the efficiency of the communication channels used, and the legitimacy of the project organizers. With the growth of the industry, the use of innovative technologies such as blockchain is expected to enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of crowdfunding projects aimed at sustainability (Gai et al., 2025).

2.2. Factors Influencing Fundraising Success in Crowdfunding

Thus, crowdfunding has grown popular in recent years. However, not all campaigns are eventually successful in completing their funding. For example, the largest crowdfunding platform in the world, Kickstarter, posts a success rate on fully funded projects at only 37.44 percent on the current website version (Shneor & Vik, 2020). Indeed, Shneor and Vik (2020), in a review paper of 88 journal articles published from 2010 to 2017, outlined three levels of success-affecting factors in crowdfunding based on these articles: macro (built on country, culture, and geography), mezzo (industry, sector, and distribution channel), and micro (people, organizations, and specific projects). Even more importantly, a large proportion of the variables brought in their study are classified on a micro-level, indicating 85% of all factors considered. This shows that most current literature emphasizes the elements related to the campaign, the entrepreneur, or the participating businesses. Extensive research focuses on the campaign level, the dimensions of which encompass media content and campaign duration, as well as the financial goals of the campaign (Shneor & Vik, 2020). These are often called non-numeric project-related data components (Cumming et al., 2020). Prior studies provide evidence that, generally, lofty funding targets lead to lower chances of success, and setting a longer duration for the campaign does not always result in a higher amount of money collected (Adamska-Mieruszewska et al., 2021). Moreover, more important in this sense will be the factor of effective communication in the campaign materials (Adamska-Mieruszewska et al., 2021). Beyond the main content of the project, Wang et al. (2018) insist that characteristics like the size of the comments, comment rating, response length, and the time lapse before responding are all positively correlated with fundraiser success.

Generally, projects with higher quality thresholds tend to attract higher levels of sponsorship (Hörisch & Tenner, 2020). As Deng et al. (2022) observe, the qualitative data state the popularity or value of projects since the platform or the backers influence the existing project.

Another important area under investigation is the level of fundraising, which includes issues related to the creators, entrepreneurs, or organizations involved in the process. The existing literature explores dimensions such as the reputation and credibility of these actors or institutions, their experience in crowdfunding, the difference between group and solo fundraisers, geographic distance, gender, human, and social capital, amongst others (Deng et al., 2022; Shneor & Vik, 2020).

The specific characteristics of fundraisers, including creativity, readiness, and enthusiasm, may hugely influence the effectiveness of the fund-gathering initiative outcome (Deng et al., 2022).

2.3. Role of Project Descriptions in Crowdfunding

In crowdfunding, the way a project is presented is of utmost importance. It is the primary way to attract potential supporters, and proper project articulation makes them perceive it better and be willing to support a project (Adamska-Mieruszewska et al., 2021; Liang et al., 2020). From empirical studies, some writers think that the choice of vocabulary or images is one of the keys to success in this area (Scheaf et al., 2018). A project description is fundamental because it provides most of the information about the project, as Zhou et al. (2018) had not conducted much research on his work.

The project description fulfills two important roles for potential investors and those launching projects. Investors rely on this information to understand the project and decide on potential financial support (Zhou et al., 2018). As crowdfunding occurs on digital platforms, project creators must produce high-interest descriptions. Emergent projects typically start in the early stages, offering some new technology services or undertaking partial activities. In a reward-based crowdfunding context, supporters financially back ‘products’ that do not yet exist, and they are now reliant on simply descriptive information. On the other hand, equity crowdfunding schemes focus on creating financial returns, and supporters in reward-based schemes invest in certain products or services. Therefore, how creators present their propositions is fundamental.

In communication, project descriptions are essential for disseminating persuasive information and facilitating decision-making and problem-solving processes (Adamska-Mieruszewska et al., 2021). Scholars have investigated the influence of the complexity and clarity of these descriptions on their effectiveness within crowdfunding platforms. In their study, Adamska-Mieruszewska et al. (2021) examined more than 2800 projects hosted on a prominent Polish platform, revealing that the descriptions’ extent and comprehensibility significantly influence fundraising results. Recently, Lagazio and Querci (2018) explored one of the Italian platforms and found that texts over 500 words raise the likelihood of achieving funding goals by 13% more than texts of under 200 words. Koch and Siering (2015) argue that there exists an increased level of detail related to a campaign’s success; thus, it also prevents information asymmetries that might lead to misinterpretation between creators and potential backers. Moy et al. (2018) found a U-shaped relationship between text length and funding success, suggesting an optimal length and that overly long descriptions could overwhelm prospective backers. Then, Liang et al. (2020) found an inverted U relationship for the number of words used in 7207 Kickstarter projects.

2.4. Sustainability in Crowdfunding

According to Ortas et al. (2013), research concludes that one of the most significant challenges to securing sustainable businesses is inadequate available capital, with more people finding that crowdfunding has become increasingly popular to make up for this lack. It is a way of raising small amounts of money from several people via the Internet to fund those with innovative ideas and business start-ups. Crowdfunding has become increasingly significant for initiators of projects and enterprises in raising the necessary funds for starting up. Social entrepreneurs often cannot mobilize the usual sources of capital and thus consider crowdfunding a more feasible option (Testa et al., 2019). Addressing systemic injustice and unsustainability is the main focus of these entrepreneurs, who seek to recognize and change these into totally new and sustainable alternatives based on responsibility towards society and time (Rosati & Faria, 2019). For this, social or sustainable entrepreneurs use the principle of the ‘triple bottom line’—where the focus is on economic, environmental, and social aspects of sustainability, instead of a focus primarily addressed to an economic aspect—in their practice (Belz & Binder, 2017; Maehle, 2020). Crowdfunding has proven to be effective in social or environmental projects for sustainable development as a source of income for such projects (Jovanović, 2019). Recently, several platforms specifically oriented towards sustainable initiatives have surfaced (e.g., Kiva and GreenCrowd), while numerous well-known crowdfunding platforms include a substantial array of sustainable projects (Maehle, 2020).

Crowdfunding has increasingly become vital for entrepreneurs with an emphasis on sustainability; however, a discussion persists regarding the effectiveness of this focus in aiding projects in securing funding. Some researchers, such as Chan et al. (2021), argue that pursuing sustainability sends messages that could influence the rationale behind supporters’ decisions to back a project. The research supports this view, indicating that core terms related to sustainability generally led to more donations and higher involvement levels, as noted by Vismara (2019). At the same time, Hörisch and Tenner (2020) pointed out that projects with an environmental focus usually result in difficulties in achieving their fundraising goals. This fact suggests that an environmental appeal can reduce the ability to raise funds. Calic and Mosakowski (2016) researched technology and movie campaigns; they established that an environmental and social focus only positively benefits technology projects, while in film projects, a social focus is rather beneficial.

According to Parhankangas and Renko (2017), traditional entrepreneurs typically know precisely what their audiences expect of them and, hence, take strong cues from the product and the movie quality indicators to supplant these expectations. Secondly, social entrepreneurs often confront more ambiguous expectations and hence need to enable mechanisms that communicate effectively and quickly build trust, according to Y. S. Chen and Chang (2012). Third, Parhankangas and Renko (2017) conducted a study based on 656 Kickstarter projects and concluded that the relatable use of linguistic style boosts success for social campaigns but not commercial ones.

Research on crowdfunding and sustainability is growing, as reflected in the increasing number of articles published yearly. As shown by Böckel et al. (2021), this work identifies that a sustainability-oriented campaign requires more strategies than a regular crowdfunding campaign. This will be necessary to underline the sustainable characteristics of the projects and their respective value for supporters and society and to match the expectations set by supporters. The project description gives an avenue for project owners to interact with supporters. Researchers, such as Liang et al. (2020), have found evidence that a comprehensive project description is generally associated with higher chances of success,. However, very few prior studies have investigated the role of project descriptions in determining the success of sustainability-related crowdfunding campaigns. This research indicates that more information about the project eliminates misunderstandings and builds trust among backers, as suggested by Macht (2014), thus ultimately securing more significant financial support; this is even more the case in sustainable crowdfunding projects because of their distinctive nature. Therefore, this thesis considers the following hypothesis:

Hypothesis 1 (H1). 

The length of the crowdfunding project description is associated with the success of sustainable crowdfunding projects under a reward-based model.

The contribution of this present study to the extant literature is that while quantity and quality are important in crowdfunding campaigns, readability must also be considered for successful fundraising. In other words, readability means how easily people can grasp the project description, and it is considered crucial for effective communication by governments, businesses, and organizations (Zhou et al., 2018). In finance, readability has generally been considered a key factor of persuasion in different contexts, such as annual reports, according to Adamska-Mieruszewska et al. (2021). Nevertheless, some studies are inconsistent regarding the readability and success of projects. Skillful writers could draft complex descriptions that build trust with potential backers, according to Zhou et al. (2018). On the other hand, Xu and Zhang (2018) found that using simpler language increases community engagement in crowdfunding updates, which also increases the likelihood of success in funding. Based on these, the research proposes:

Hypothesis 2 (H2). 

The readability of a crowdfunding project description is related to the success of sustainable crowdfunding projects in the reward-based model.

3. Methodology

3.1. Analytical Approach and Data Source

This study investigates the association between length and readability in crowdfunding project descriptions and their outcomes for sustainability in crowdfunding projects. In this quantitative research, a dataset found on Kaggle is used. It merges two secondary datasets, one containing comprehensive data on Kickstarter projects and another containing project description data. Kickstarter is the primary case because of its popularity and widespread application in crowdfunding research. It combines 14,337 projects from October 2009 to February 2017, purely in the technology category; hence, it is representative. The dependent variable is fundraising success, defined as the meeting of one’s financial goal; thus, it is a binary variable taking a value of 0-failure or 1-success. The independent variables, therefore, are project description length in words and readability, measured through the Gunning Fog Index. The Gunning Fog Index was introduced by Robert Gunning in 1952 (Gunning, 1952) and has been used by other researchers to measure readability (Adamska-Mieruszewska et al., 2021; Liang et al., 2020; Zhou et al., 2018; F. Li, 2008). This formula calculates how easy or hard it is to understand a text based on sentence length and word complexity. The readability formula accounts for the number of complex words containing more than three syllables and sentence length. The higher the score, the harder the material is to read. This research explores those features of project descriptions that determine crowdfunding success, focusing on sustainability-related projects.

To be more specific, the formula for the Gunning Fog Index is shown below.

$$\mathrm{The} \mathrm{Gunning} \mathrm{Fox} \mathrm{Index} =\left[{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{words}}{\mathrm{sentences}}}+100\times {\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{complex} \mathrm{words}}{ \mathrm{words}}}\right]\times 0.4$$

The reading ease is usually best in a Gunning Fog Index of between 12 and 14. The reading is difficult if the Gunning Fog Index is between 14 and 18. When the Gunning Fog Index exceeds 18, the text is unreadable. According to F. Li (2008), when the index is below 12 and above 10, the readability of the text is sufficient. A higher Gunning Fog Index value corresponds to lesser readability, and thus, readability makes use of the negative form of the Gunning Fog Index, as seen by Zhou et al. (2018):

$$\mathrm{Readability}=-\left[{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{words}}{\mathrm{sentences}}}+100\times {\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{complex} \mathrm{words}}{ \mathrm{words}}}\right]\times 0.4$$

This study controls for funding goals, project duration, and launch year to capture any other variables behind this effect. Funding goal controls, as lower goals, are easier to attain. Duration is the time in days a project is open to funding, and shorter durations are more likely to be successful—launch year controls for time effects. Controls allow for the impact that description length and readability have on crowdfunding success in isolation. The variables and their measures are provided in

Table 1. Variables and their measures.

Variables	Measures
Dependent Variable
Crowdfunding Success	The value of successful fundraising is 1, otherwise it is 0
Independent Variable
Length	Number of words in project description
Readability	The negative value of Gunning Fox Index
Control Variable
Goal	The financial amount the projects aim to reach (US dollars)
Duration	The number of days that a project accepts funds from backers
Year	The year when the projects were launched

.

The current study quantifies the sustainability orientation of a project by proposing a keyword-based measurement using SDGs. It lists 17 SDG goals and counts the number of relevant keywords present in the descriptions of a project. It is quantified by a new variable, SDG kw count, where the higher counts suggest the higher sustainability orientation of a project. Projects with no SDG keywords will be less sustainable, and their SDGs_kw_count will be marked as zero. This variable is used to measure the sustainability aspect of each project.

Table 2. Seventeen sustainable development goals (SDGs); source: United Nations (2015).

SDGs Goal
1. No Poverty	10. Reduced Inequalities
2. Zero Hunger	11. Sustainable Cities and Communities
3. Good Health and Well-being	12. Responsible Consumption and Production
4. Quality Education	13. Climate Change
5. Gender Equality	14. Life Below Water
6. Clean Water and Sanitation	15. Life on Land
7. Affordable and Clean Energy	16. Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions
8. Decent Work and Economic Growth	17. Partnerships for the Goals
9. Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure

presents the 17 sustainable development goals (SDGs).

The paper further analyzes the average basket value and compares crowdfunding and e-commerce for reward-based and donation-based models. Many crowdfunding project owners wish to “pre-sell” products or services, like e-commerce. E-commerce merchants seek to increase the average basket value to increase overall sales. This, too, translates into crowdfunding, and the authors review how pivotal the average basket value is in crowdfunding success. This additional determinant accounts for the financial behavior of backers in crowdfunding projects.

3.2. Data Analysis and Model

The data gathered are coded and entered into the Jupyter Notebook (version 6.5.2), the Python-integrated development environment (Python version 3.10.9). Because the dependent variable of this research is a binary variable, several logistic regression models are constructed to examine the effect of project descriptions on fundraising success.

Other primary variables that could also affect project success, such as goal, duration, and year, are held constant to examine what degree of influence the independent variables have. Below is one logistic regression model presented in the study:

logit(Fundrasing Success)                     
= β₀ + β₁length + β₂readability + β₃goal
+ β₄duration + β₅year + β₆SDGs_kw_count
+ β₇avg_basket_value + 𝜖

where the control variables are goal, duration, and year.

3.3. Validity of the Research

The external validity is very high because the Kickstarter data utilized represent crowdfunding websites. Ecological validity dominates because the data tracked the behavior of actual customers in the real world. Measurement validity is also enhanced by using word count and the Gunning Fog Index to measure project description readability and length. However, the study has internal validity limitations in the sense that it does not control for confounding variables like project category or creator reputation, which are bound to influence crowdfunding success. These flaws could reduce the internal validity of the research.

3.4. Reliability of the Research

The Kaggle data are publicly available; thus, the research process is very easily reproducible, enhancing reliability. The operational definitions and data analysis procedures are made explicit, ensuring that the findings from this study will be consistent with those of whoever is conducting the research. Overall, this research is very reliable.

4. Empirical Results

4.1. Descriptive Results

The descriptive statistics analysis results are reported in

Table 3. Descriptive statistics.

Variable	Min	1st Q	Medium	Mean	3rd Q	Max	Std Deviation
length	105	276	508	676.16	902	4921	558.11
readability	−155.82	−15.4	−13.49	−11.87	−11.31	−5.36	4.31
goal	1	5000	18,000	85,066.1	50,000	100,000,000	1,247,912
duration	1	30	30	34.78	40	60	11.07
year	2009	2014	2015	2014.66	2016	2017	1.23
SDGs_kw_count	0	1	2	2.75	4	40	3.26
average_basket_value	0	13	49.81	103.49	115.41	4408.68	197.43

: means, standard deviation, maximum, and minimum. The project description length in our sample varies between 105 words and 4921 words, with an average of 676.16 words SD = 558.11. The readability of the project is −11.87 on average SD = 4.31, which is very readable, as Zhou et al. (2018) suggested. Additionally, the sample projects have an average funding goal of USD 85,006.1, SD = 1,247,912, which is comparatively larger compared to other studies such as those of (Liang et al., 2020; Zhou et al., 2018). The mean of the SDG keywords in this dataset is 2.75 (SD = 3.26), and the median number is 2, indicating that more than 50% of projects contain only 2, 1, or 0 SDG keywords in the project descriptions.

Although the highest number of SDG keywords is 40, crowdfunding projects with several SDG keywords are not common. Finally, the average basket value is USD 103.49 (SD = 197.43), ranging from USD 0 to 4408.68.

Of the 12,613 Kickstarter projects, 8754, or 69.4%, failed to achieve their goal amount, and 3859, or 30.6%, succeeded in achieving their goal. Successful projects totaled more than 3.4 billion, pledged by more than 2.85 million backers, and unsuccessful projects totaled more than 2.7 billion, pledged by 228 thousand backers. Also,

Table 4. Status of projects by goal, backers, amount pledged, and average basket value.

Status of Projects	Count of Projects	Average of the Amount of Goal	Sum of Backers	Sum of the Amount of Pledged	Average Basket Value
Fail	8754 (69.4%)	110,468.78	228,089	27,484,671.63	76.55
Success	3859 (30.6%)	27,441.03	2,857,294	345,281,520.2	164.62
Total	12,613	85,066.10	3,085,383	372,766,191.8	103.49

shows that the average basket value of each backer in the successful projects is well above that of the failed projects, at USD 164.62 and USD 76.55, respectively.

Regarding the variables addressed by this research, the performance of these variables from failed projects to successful projects is demonstrated in

Table 5. Status of projects by length, readability, and SDGs_kw_count.

Status of Projects	Average of Length	Average of Readability	Average of SDGs_kw_count
Fail	588.05	−14.20	2.51
Success	876.06	−13.60	3.32
Total	676.17	−14.01	2.76

. From the table, the average project description length of the successful projects is longer than that of the failed projects, with 876.06 and 588.05, respectively, and a word count of nearly 300 words. As far as readability is concerned, there is not much difference. The projects’ readability in the successful projects is slightly lower than in the failed projects: −13.60 and −14.20, respectively. In other words, the project descriptions of the successful projects were more readable than those of the failed projects. Regarding SDG-related keywords, successful projects generally have more keywords related to SDGs, but not by much. The results of the further research are represented in the following section.

The study identified that 9760 projects, making up 77.4% of the dataset, focus on sustainability, while 2853 projects, or 22.6%, do not. According to

Table 6. Sustainable orientation by goal, backers, amount pledged, and average basket value.

Sustainable Orientation	Count of Projects	Average of the Amount Goal	Average of Backers	Sum of the Amount Pledged	Average Basket Value
No	2853 (22.6%)	104,401.64	100.90	24,378,654.51	59.99
Yes	9760 (77.4%)	79,414.02	286.63	3,483,875,373.3	116.21
Total	12,613	85,066.10	244.62	3,727,661,918.8	103.49

, the average funding goal for sustainable projects is nearly 80,000, which is lower than the goal set by non-sustainable projects. In terms of funding, sustainable projects have amassed over 3.4 billion in pledges, while non-sustainable ones have gathered just over 243 million. Sustainable projects tend to attract more backers, with an average of over 286 supporters, compared to only 100 for non-sustainable projects. Furthermore, the average pledge amount per supporter is higher for sustainable projects, at 116.21, whereas it stands at 59.99 for projects lacking a sustainability focus.

The study examined how long and readable the project descriptions were for sustainability- and non-sustainability-focused projects, as shown in

Table 7. Sustainable orientation by length and readability.

Sustainable Orientation	Average of Length	Average of Readability
No	342.12	−13.56
Yes	773.82	−14.15
Total	676.17	−14.01

. On average, the descriptions for sustainability-focused projects are longer, with 773.82 words, while those without a sustainability focus have 342.12 words. However, the readability score is slightly lower for sustainability-focused projects at −14.15, compared to −13.56 for those without a sustainability focus. This suggests that descriptions for sustainable projects are slightly more difficult to read than those without a sustainability orientation.

The research tallies projects associated with each sustainable development goal (SDG); the findings are detailed in

Table 8. The number of projects regarding each sustainable development goal.

SDGs Goal	Number of Projects Related
1. No Poverty	2533
2. Zero Hunger	2532
3. Good Health and Well-being	2794
4. Quality Education	1824
5. Gender Equality	1043
6. Clean Water and Sanitation	349
7. Affordable and Clean Energy	3815
8. Decent Work and Economic Growth	810
9. Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure	1083
10. Reduced Inequalities	1383
11. Sustainable Cities and Communities	1370
12. Responsible Consumption and Production	3949
13. Climate Change	1092
14. Life Below Water	1087
15. Life on Land	1859
16. Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions	1306
17. Partnerships for the Goals	21

. The authors used a keyword list from Institut Teknologi Sepuluh Nopember, published in 2021, to develop a sustainability indicator; this list includes specific terms for all 17 SDGs. Some terms apply to several goals, resulting in overlaps. The authors refined the list by eliminating general terms like “wood”, “lake”, and “water” to focus on projects that truly align with sustainability objectives. In Table 8, it is clear that most sustainable development goals have more than 1000 projects. However, goal no.6, which is about clean water and sanitation, only has 349 projects, and goal no.17, dealing with partnerships for the goals, has just 21 projects. The goal with the highest number of projects is goal no.12, Responsible Consumption and Production, with 3949 projects. Next in line is goal no.7, which focuses on affordable and clean energy, with 3815 projects. Both goals are tied to environmental sustainability, aiming to cut down on plastic waste and reduce carbon dioxide emissions.

The authors sort projects by the number of unique sustainable development goal (SDG) keywords to see how using sustainable keywords in project descriptions affects crowdfunding success. Each keyword is only counted once, no matter how often it appears. The projects are divided into five categories:

-

Group A: Projects with more than 20 different SDG keywords.

-

Group B: Projects with 6 to 19 SDG keywords.

-

Group C: Projects with three to five SDG keywords.

-

Group D: Projects with one or two SDG keywords.

-

Group E: Projects with no SDG keywords.

The criteria for these groups and the number of projects in each are detailed in

Table 9. The standard of SDG keywords ranking and the corresponding number of projects.

SDGs Keywords Ranking	Number of SDGs Keywords	Count of Projects
A	≥ 20	47 (0.37%)
B	6−19	1728 (13.7%)
C	3−5	3250 (25.7%)
D	1−2	4735 (37.5%)
E	0	2853 (22.6%)
Total		12,613

.

After categorizing the projects, the authors analyzed the length of project descriptions, how easy they are to read, and the average pledge per supporter for each category.

Figure 1 reveals that descriptions with more sustainable development goal (SDG) keywords generally have more words. Projects rated A for having many SDG keywords have descriptions averaging 2062.09 words. B-rated projects, with fewer keywords, average 1252.69 words. Projects with no SDG keywords are rated E and have much shorter descriptions, averaging 342.166 words.

When looking at readability, scores change with different SDG keyword rankings. Projects that rank higher with these keywords usually have lower readability scores. This makes their descriptions harder for potential supporters to understand. Research suggests a good Gunning Fog Index score is between 10 and 14 (Liang et al., 2020; Zhou et al., 2018). This means that keywords for projects ranked A in SDGs are not as easy to read. Figure 2 shows how these readability scores are spread based on SDG keyword rankings.

Projects that receive an A ranking for sustainable development goal (SDG) keywords usually have longer and harder-to-read descriptions. This is likely because of the nature of sustainable crowdfunding projects. First, sustainability is a new and changing idea for many people, as Battilana and Lee (2014) mentioned. Because of this, project creators need to use many words and provide a detailed background to clearly explain their plans and the solutions they offer through crowdfunding. Also, sustainable concepts linked to SDG keywords are believed to often include technical terms with many syllables, making the text more challenging to read and understand.

There is a noticeable pattern in how much money people spend on projects linked to specific sustainable development goals (SDGs). Projects with SDG keywords ranked in category A receive about USD 146.469 from each supporter, while those in category B obtain around USD 153.903. On the other hand, projects with keywords ranked in category E receive significantly less, with each backer contributing only about USD 60 on average. This information is depicted in Figure 3.

4.2. Logistic Regression Analysis

Because the outcome is either 0 or 1, logistic regression analysis was used. For this study, we developed eight models. Model 1 contains only the basic factors we wanted to control for and the outcome. To examine each idea independently, the authors added a new factor to Models 2 through 8. Model 8 is the most comprehensive, including all factors. The analysis results are presented in

Table 10. Regression analysis results on the success of sustainable crowdfunding (12,613 observations).

Variables	Model 1	Model 2	Model 3	Model 4	Model 5	Model 6	Model 7	Model 8
	Controls Only	Words_Count	Reada-Bility	SDGs_kw_Count	Average_Basket_Value	Length, Reada-Bility	Length, Readability, SDGs_kw_Count	All Variables
Controls
log(Goal)	−0.2936 ***	−0.4592 ***	−0.2894 ***	−0.3645 ***	−0.4153 ***	−0.4549 ***	−0.4606 ***	−0.5613 ***
	(0.000)	(0.000)	(0.000)	(0.000)	(0.000)	(0.000)	(0.000)	(0.000)
Duration	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
Year	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
Main effects
log(length)			1.1260 ***			1.1329 ***	1.0729 ***	1.0080 ***
			(0.000)			(0.000)	(0.000)	(0.000)
Readability			0.0337 ***			0.0446 ***	0.0487 ***	0.0512 ***
			(0.000)			(0.000)	(0.000)	(0.000)
log(SDGs_kw_count)				0.5569 ***			0.1110 ***	0.0945 ***
				(0.000)			(0.001)	(0.004)
average_basket_value					0.0041 ***			0.0034 ***
					(0.000)			(0.000)
constant	1.4699 ***	−3.8900 ***	1.9094 ***	1.7417 ***	2.1824 ***	−3.3420 ***	−2.9416 ***	−1.9368 ***
Model Summary
Pseudo R-square	0.05492	0.1468	0.05718	0.08351	0.1151	0.1496	0.1504	0.1911

*** p ≤ 0.01.

, which includes 12,613 observations.

The study labeled as H1 explores how the length of project descriptions influences the success of sustainable crowdfunding campaigns. In Table 10, it is shown that longer descriptions have a positive effect on crowdfunding success, as seen in both single and multiple logistic regression models. Specifically, from Model 2 to Model 8, there is a noticeable positive link between the length of the description and success in raising funds. The coefficient, which is 1.0080 with a p-value of less than 0.001, suggests that for every 1% increase in the description’s length, the chances of successfully raising funds increase by 1.0080 times. These findings support the H1 hypothesis, indicating that longer project descriptions are likely to improve the outcomes of crowdfunding efforts focused on sustainability.

This finding matches what other studies have discovered. Research by Zhou et al. (2018) and Adamska-Mieruszewska et al. (2021) and her team in 2021 showed that having longer project descriptions can make crowdfunding efforts more successful. This idea supports the belief that because sustainability is a relatively new concept for many people, entrepreneurs must work harder to clearly explain their projects to potential supporters (Petruzzelli et al., 2019). By sharing more detailed information about their projects, owners can lessen the uncertainty potential backers might feel and boost their confidence and willingness to support the projects.

Research indicates that the length of project descriptions impacts crowdfunding success in a more complex, upside-down U-shaped way because too much information can overwhelm potential backers. Studies by Liang et al. (2020) back this up. Liang’s research suggests that when a description goes beyond 2013 words, it may hinder success. This highlights the importance of finding the correct word count, as going over this range can reduce effectiveness. The relationship between the length of a project description and its success on crowdfunding platforms is not straightforward, as more words do not always lead to better outcomes.

The research identified as H2 explores how making project descriptions easier to read influences the success of sustainable crowdfunding. According to Table 10, both straightforward and detailed statistical evaluations show a positive connection between readability and crowdfunding success. In Model 3, an increase in readability (with a coefficient of 0.0037 and a p-value less than 0.001) is linked to better outcomes. Similarly, in Model 8, a 1% boost in readability raises the chances of successful fundraising by 0.0487, with a p-value below 0.001. This evidence supports H2, demonstrating that improved readability significantly enhances the likelihood of crowdfunding success.

This study’s logistic regression findings contrast with those of earlier research. Previous studies by Liang et al. (2020) and Zhou et al. (2018) suggested that readability does not significantly boost fundraising success. However, this study agrees with Adamska-Mieruszewska et al. (2021), indicating that when descriptions are easier to read, potential supporters can understand them better, reducing misunderstandings and improving the likelihood of project success. In general, supporters favor project descriptions that are clear and easy to follow. There are three main reasons for this. Firstly, sustainable crowdfunding projects are relatively new and constantly changing (Battilana & Lee, 2014); so, potential backers often look for simple explanations to comprehend these new concepts.

Additionally, these projects must communicate clearly to convey their value, which might not be immediately apparent (Parhankangas & Renko, 2017). Secondly, clearer descriptions help minimize confusion and build trust between supporters and projects, making people more inclined to donate. Thirdly, in reward-based crowdfunding, where supporters usually give small amounts, overly detailed and complex descriptions can be discouraging (Adamska-Mieruszewska et al., 2021). Supporters generally do not want to invest too much time deciphering complicated information, especially when they feel their small contributions do not warrant such an effort.

The study investigates factors such as SDGs_kw_count and average_basket_value, which positively affect crowdfunding success. SDGs_kw_count has a coefficient of 0.0945, and average_basket_value has a coefficient of 0.0034, with both showing significance at p < 0.001. This indicates that these factors boost the likelihood of a crowdfunding project succeeding.

SDGs_kw_count refers to the number of sustainability-related keywords used in a project’s description. The research finds that projects focusing more on sustainability by including these keywords are more likely to meet their financial goals. This finding is consistent with earlier research, all of which concludes that a sustainable approach improves crowdfunding outcomes (Calic & Mosakowski, 2016; Hörisch & Tenner, 2020; Lam & Law, 2016; Vismara, 2019).

The study further explores the influence of sustainability on crowdfunding success. It reveals that for every 1% increase in SDG-related keywords in project descriptions, the odds of successful fundraising rise by 0.0945. Therefore, highlighting sustainability in project descriptions significantly enhances the chances of reaching financial targets.

The average amount each supporter donates to a crowdfunding campaign, known as the average basket value, plays a crucial role in determining the success of the fundraising effort. A positive link exists between the amount each backer contributes and the likelihood of the project meeting its funding goals. Specifically, for every 1% increase in the average donation, the chances of successfully raising funds improve by 0.0034. This relationship is backed by strong evidence, with a coefficient of 0.0034 and a p-value of less than 0.001, highlighting its statistical significance. Essentially, the slight increase in contributions from each supporter enhances the project’s chances of reaching its financial objectives.

4.3. Evaluation of Predicting Performance

This study compares how well the new model (Model 8) predicts against the popular model (Model 1), which relies on the basic control factors mentioned earlier. The researchers divided the data, using 80% to train the logistic regression model and 20% to test its predictions. They assessed prediction accuracy and included the F-measure, which evaluates prediction and recall accuracy for a more balanced performance view. This approach is supported by Lipton et al. (2014) and Novaković et al. (2017). Detailed results are provided in

Table 11. Performance measures.

	Model 1 Mainstream Model	Model 8 Proposed Model
Accuracy	70.60%	75.90%
F-measure	17.41%	49.58%

.

This study looks at how well a new model (Model 8) predicts outcomes compared to a commonly used model (Model 1), which only considers certain control factors discussed earlier. As shown in Table 11, the new model achieves a prediction accuracy of 75.90% and an F-measure of 49.58%. In contrast, the common model has a prediction accuracy of 70.60% and an F-measure of 17.41%. A higher F-measure, as noted by Y. Li and Chen (2018), means the model is better. This suggests that the new model is more effective at predicting funding success.

To evaluate predicting models, we often look at accuracy and the F-measure. Another useful tool is the receiver operation characteristic (ROC) curve, which visually shows how well predictions are classified as positive or negative. It helps identify the best decision threshold for optimal results (Bradley, 1997; Nahm, 2022). We also use the area under the ROC curve (AUC) as a metric. The AUC gives a score from 0 to 1, with 1 indicating perfect model performance.

Figure 4 displays the ROC curves for Model 8, Model 1, and a baseline, illustrating each model’s ability to predict outcomes such as fundraising success. Model 8’s curve is more pronounced and closer to the top left corner than Model 1’s. This indicates that Model 8 achieves a higher true positive rate and a lower false positive rate, making it more effective for predicting outcomes. This advantage is valuable for people launching projects, as it helps them assess and adjust their projects to improve funding success before starting (Zhou et al., 2018).

Moreover, Model 8 boasts a higher AUC value of 0.8033 than Model 1’s 0.6492, signifying greater accuracy. The larger area under Model 8’s curve suggests it is positioned closer to the left side of the graph in Figure 4, underscoring its superior performance relative to Model 1.

5. Conclusions

Interest in crowdfunding is growing, but the success rate on the top platform is still below 50%. This has led to a lot of research into what makes crowdfunding work. It is easier for entrepreneurs with sustainable business ideas to access crowdfunding than traditional fundraising, making it a popular choice for eco-friendly businesses looking for money. Because of this, the topic of sustainable crowdfunding and what influences its success has captured the attention of many scholars. This study explores how the quantity and quality of project descriptions can affect the outcomes of sustainable crowdfunding efforts.

This study looks at the length and readability of project descriptions. Length shows how much text there is, while readability shows how easy it is to understand. The authors had two main ideas. The first idea is that the length of a crowdfunding project description might affect sustainable projects’ success in a reward-based model. The second idea is that readability might influence the same model’s success. To test these ideas, the study uses data from Kickstarter, covering 12,613 projects. The researcher uses multiple logistic regression models to examine the link between these variables and project success. The study shows that the length and readability of project descriptions significantly impact crowdfunding success. This backs up our first two ideas. For the first idea, having more words in project descriptions boosts the chances of sustainable crowdfunding success (with a coefficient of 1.0080 and a p-value of less than 0.001). More words help share more information, reduce gaps in understanding, and provide better explanations about sustainable crowdfunding. For the second idea, project descriptions that are easier to read are linked to better fundraising results (with a coefficient of 0.0487 and a p-value of less than 0.001). This finding agrees with some earlier studies, like the one by Adamska-Mieruszewska et al. (2021), but it differs from others, such as those by Liang et al. (2020) and Zhou et al. (2018).

The literature highlights the importance of a strong narrative in the success of crowdfunding campaigns for promoting sustainability. It is clear from the literature that narratives have the capacity to engage and inform possible donors; hence, when such narratives are carefully designed to highlight the social or environmental benefits linked with the project, they greatly increase the possibility of raising the necessary funds (Adamska-Mieruszewska et al., 2021; Mollick, 2014). Additionally, clear and concise statements on the distribution of funds, backed by detailed examinations of the long-term implications involved with the respective projects, have been linked to a greater success rate in obtaining funds for these projects (Ryu, 2024). Recent studies on this issue have proven that projects most in line with the United Nations’ sustainable development goals have a better ability to attract greater interest from respective donors, thus promoting greater confidence and popularity among the general public (Kim et al., 2021).

On the other hand, empirical studies show that crowdfunding campaign narratives are not always the decisive determinants of the success of sustainable crowdfunding campaigns. For instance, Liang et al. (2020) showed that perceived novelty of the campaign, project leader credibility, and social network presence are more important determinants of campaign success than the narrative. Similarly, Zhou et al. (2018) argue that a project description can provide necessary information to potential funders; however, it does not guarantee fundraising success, especially when external market conditions and other factors, such as the economic well-being of the target market, are likely to have a greater impact. Such claims suggest that while project descriptions are of significant value, they are not the sole determinants of crowdfunding success under different situations.

This research demonstrates that better readability increases a project’s chances of success. Project descriptions should use informal or simple language to clarify the information for potential backers. This clarity helps supporters understand and view the project positively, which boosts the likelihood of crowdfunding success. In conclusion, this study highlights that having longer, more readable project descriptions is key to reaching funding goals.

The study looks at how focusing on sustainability impacts the success of crowdfunding projects. Not many have examined this connection. Including more keywords related to sustainable development goals (SDGs) in project descriptions improves crowdfunding success. This underscores the vital role of sustainability in these projects.

Despite its worthwhile contribution, the study exhibits a few limitations that might offer directions for future research. First, and as mentioned, four crowdfunding models exist: donation-based, reward-based, equity-based, and lending-based. This research focuses specifically on the reward-based crowdfunding model, utilizing data exclusively from Kickstarter. While Kickstarter defines itself as the largest crowdfunding website in the world, such a claim necessarily limits the generalizability of the findings. Second, the selection of studies is limited to the technological sector, thereby introducing potential biases. Future research may explore crowdfunding efforts across models or websites that prioritize environmentally friendly causes, such as Kiva and GreenCrowd.

Third, this research only examines the textual aspects of project descriptions. However, visual aspects, including images and videos, are essential elements of these descriptions. Visual media are often considered more effective communication tools than text because they involve more than one sensory system in content processing (Scheinbaum et al., 2017). The researcher cannot access this kind of data in the dataset due to technical limitations.

Finally, this research does not claim authority with regard to the individual characteristics of supporters, such as age, gender, income, experience with crowdfunding, or interest in specific categories, all of which may influence their decision making. Future studies may further elaborate on the matters covered in this work.