Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search This article may be too technical for most readers to understand. Please improve this article to make it understandable to non-experts, without removing the technical details. (January 2010)
Community-based savings bank in Cambodia. There are a rich variety of financial institutions which serve the poor. Microfinance is the provision of financial services to low-income clients or solidarity lending groups including consumers and the self-employed, who traditionally lack access to banking and related services. More broadly, it is a movement whose object is "a world in which as many poor and nearpoor households as possible have permanent access to an appropriate range of high quality financial services, including not just credit but also savings, insurance, and fund transfers."[1] Those who promote microfinance generally believe that such access will help poor people out of poverty. Microfinance is a broad category of services, which includes microcredit. Microcredit is provision of credit services to poor clients. Although microcredit is one of the aspects of microfinance, conflation of the two terms is epidemic in public discourse. Critics often attack microcredit while referring to it indiscriminately as either 'microcredit' or 'microfinance'. Due to the broad range of microfinance services, it is difficult to assess impact, and very few studies have tried to assess its full impact.[2]
Contents
[hide]
1 Challenges 2 Boundaries and principles 3 Debates at the boundaries 4 Financial needs of poor people 5 Ways in which poor people manage their money 6 Current scale of microfinance operations 7 "Inclusive financial systems"
8 Microcredit and the web 9 Evidence for reducing poverty 10 Microfinance and social interventions 11 Other criticisms 12 Bibliography 13 See also 14 Notes 15 External links
[edit] Challenges
Traditionally, banks have not provided financial services, such as loans, to clients with little or no cash income. Banks incur substantial costs to manage a client account, regardless of how small the sums of money involved. For example, although the total gross revenue from delivering one hundred loans worth $1,000 each will not differ greatly from the revenue that results from delivering one loan of $100,000, it takes nearly a hundred times as much work and cost to manage a hundred loans as it does to manage one. The fixed cost of processing loans of any size is considerable as assessment of potential borrowers, their repayment prospects and security; administration of outstanding loans, collecting from delinquent borrowers, etc., has to be done in all cases. There is a break-even point in providing loans or deposits below which banks lose money on each transaction they make. Poor people usually fall below that breakeven point. A similar equation resists efforts to deliver other financial services to poor people. In addition, most poor people have few assets that can be secured by a bank as collateral. As documented extensively by Hernando de Soto and others, even if they happen to own land in the developing world, they may not have effective title to it.[3] This means that the bank will have little recourse against defaulting borrowers. Seen from a broader perspective, the development of a healthy national financial system has long been viewed as a catalyst for the broader goal of national economic development (see for example Alexander Gerschenkron, Paul Rosenstein-Rodan, Joseph Schumpeter, Anne Krueger ). However, the efforts of national planners and experts to develop financial services for most people have often failed in developing countries, for reasons summarized well by Adams, Graham & Von Pischke in their classic analysis 'Undermining Rural Development with Cheap Credit'.[4] Because of these difficulties, when poor people borrow they often rely on relatives or a local moneylender, whose interest rates can be very high. An analysis of 28 studies of informal moneylending rates in 14 countries in Asia, Latin America and Africa concluded that 76% of moneylender rates exceed 10% per month, including 22% that exceeded 100% per month. Moneylenders usually charge higher rates to poorer borrowers than to less poor ones.[5] While moneylenders are often demonized and accused of usury, their services are convenient and fast, and they can be very flexible when borrowers run into problems. Hopes of quickly putting them out of business have proven unrealistic, even in places where microfinance institutions are active.[citation needed] Over the past centuries practical visionaries, from the Franciscan monks who founded the community-oriented pawnshops of the 15th century, to the founders of the European credit union movement in the 19th century (such as Friedrich Wilhelm Raiffeisen) and the founders of the microcredit movement in the 1970s (such as Muhammad Yunus) have tested practices and built institutions designed to bring the kinds of opportunities and risk-management tools
that financial services can provide to the doorsteps of poor people.[6] While the success of the Grameen Bank (which now serves over 7 million poor Bangladeshi women) has inspired the world, it has proved difficult to replicate this success. In nations with lower population densities, meeting the operating costs of a retail branch by serving nearby customers has proven considerably more challenging. Hans Dieter Seibel, board member of the European Microfinance Platform, is in favour of the group model. This particular model (used by many Microfinance institutions) makes financial sense, he says, because it reduces transaction costs. Microfinance programmes also need to be based on local funds. Local Roots Although much progress has been made, the problem has not been solved yet, and the overwhelming majority of people who earn less than $1 a day, especially in the rural areas, continue to have no practical access to formal sector finance. Microfinance has been growing rapidly with $25 billion currently at work in microfinance loans.[7] It is estimated that the industry needs $250 billion to get capital to all the poor people who need it.[7] The industry has been growing rapidly, and concerns have arisen that the rate of capital flowing into microfinance is a potential risk unless managed well.[8] As seen in the State of Andhra Pradesh (India), these systems can easily fail. Some reasons being lack of use by potential customers, over-indebtedness, poor operating procedures, neglect of duties and inadequate regulations.[9]
services. 2. Microfinance must be useful to poor households: helping them raise income, build up assets and/or cushion themselves against external shocks.
3. "Microfinance can pay for itself."[10] Subsidies from donors and government are scarce
and uncertain, and so to reach large numbers of poor people, microfinance must pay for itself. 4. Microfinance means building permanent local institutions. 5. Microfinance also means integrating the financial needs of poor people into a country's mainstream financial system.
6. "The job of government is to enable financial services, not to provide them."[11] 7. "Donor funds should complement private capital, not compete with it."[11] 8. "The key bottleneck is the shortage of strong institutions and managers."[11] Donors
9. Interest rate ceilings hurt poor people by preventing microfinance institutions from covering their costs, which chokes off the supply of credit. 10. Microfinance institutions should measure and disclose their performance both financially and socially. Microfinance is considered as a tool for socio-economic development,and can be clearly distinguished from charity. Families who are destitute, or so poor they are unlikely to be able to generate the cash flow required to repay a loan, should be recipients of charity. Others are best served by financial institutions.
(51% female clients). The delinquency rate for solidarity lending was 0.9% after 30 days (individual lending3.1%), while 0.3% of loans were written off (individual lending 0.9%).[14] Because operating margins become tighter the smaller the loans delivered, many MFIs consider the risk of lending to men to be too high. This focus on women is questioned sometimes, however. A recent study of microenterpreneurs from Sri Lanka published by the World Bank found that the return on capital for male-owned businesses (half of the sample) averaged 11%, whereas the return for women-owned businesses was 0% or slightly negative.
[15]
Microfinancial services may be needed everywhere, including the developed world.[citation needed] However, in developed economies intense competition within the financial sector, combined with a diverse mix of different types of financial institutions with different missions, ensures that most people have access to some financial services.[citation needed] Efforts to transfer microfinance innovations such as solidarity lending from developing countries to developed ones have met with little success.[16]
Financial needs and financial services. In developing economies and particularly in the rural areas, many activities that would be classified in the developed world as financial are not monetized: that is, money is not used to carry them out. Almost by definition, poor people have very little money. But circumstances often arise in their lives in which they need money or the things money can buy. In Stuart Rutherfords recent book The Poor and Their Money, he cites several types of needs:[17]
Lifecycle Needs: such as weddings, funerals, childbirth, education, homebuilding, widowhood, old age. Personal Emergencies: such as sickness, injury, unemployment, theft, harassment or death. Disasters: such as fires, floods, cyclones and man-made events like war or bulldozing of dwellings. Investment Opportunities: expanding a business, buying land or equipment, improving housing, securing a job (which often requires paying a large bribe), etc.
Poor people find creative and often collaborative ways to meet these needs, primarily through creating and exchanging different forms of non-cash value. Common substitutes for cash vary from country to country but typically include livestock, grains, jewelry, and precious metals.
As Marguerite Robinson describes in The Microfinance Revolution, the 1980s demonstrated that "microfinance could provide large-scale outreach profitably," and in the 1990s, "microfinance began to develop as an industry" (2001, p. 54). In the 2000s, the microfinance industry's objective is to satisfy the unmet demand on a much larger scale, and to play a role in reducing poverty. While much progress has been made in developing a viable, commercial microfinance sector in the last few decades, several issues remain that need to be addressed before the industry will be able to satisfy massive worldwide demand. The obstacles or challenges to building a sound commercial microfinance industry include:
Inappropriate donor subsidies Poor regulation and supervision of deposit-taking MFIs Few MFIs that meet the needs for savings, remittances or insurance Limited management capacity in MFIs Institutional inefficiencies Need for more dissemination and adoption of rural, agricultural microfinance methodologies
Saving up Rutherford argues that the basic problem poor people as money managers face is to gather a 'usefully large' amount of money. Building a new home may involve saving and protecting diverse building materials for years until enough are available to proceed with construction. Childrens schooling may be funded by buying chickens and raising them for sale as needed for expenses, uniforms, bribes, etc. Because all the value is accumulated before it is needed, this money management strategy is referred to as 'saving up'.[citation needed] Often people don't have enough money when they face a need, so they borrow. A poor family might borrow from relatives to buy land, from a moneylender to buy rice, or from a microfinance institution to buy a sewing machine. Since these loans must be repaid by saving after the cost is incurred, Rutherford calls this 'saving down'. Rutherford's point is that microcredit is addressing only half the problem, and arguably the less important half: poor people borrow to help them save and accumulate assets. Microcredit institutions should fund their loans through savings accounts that help poor people manage their myriad risks.[citation
needed]
Saving down Most needs are met through mix of saving and credit. A benchmark impact assessment of Grameen Bank and two other large microfinance institutions in Bangladesh found that for every $1 they were lending to clients to finance rural non-farm micro-enterprise, about $2.50 came from other sources, mostly their clients' savings.[18] This parallels the experience in the West, in which family businesses are funded mostly from savings, especially during start-up. Recent studies have also shown that informal methods of saving are unsafe. For example a study by Wright and Mutesasira in Uganda concluded that "those with no option but to save in the informal sector are almost bound to lose some money probably around one quarter of what they save there."[19] The work of Rutherford, Wright and others has caused practitioners to reconsider a key aspect of the microcredit paradigm: that poor people get out of poverty by borrowing, building microenterprises and increasing their income. The new paradigm places more attention on the efforts of poor people to reduce their many vulnerabilities by keeping more of what they earn and building up their assets. While they need loans, they may find it as useful to borrow for consumption as for microenterprise. A safe, flexible place to save money and withdraw it when needed is also essential for managing household and family risk.[citation
needed]
An important source of detailed data on selected microfinance institutions is the MicroBanking Bulletin, which is published by Microfinance Information Exchange. At the end of 2009 it was tracking 1,084 MFIs that were serving 74 million borrowers ($38 billion in outstanding loans) and 67 million savers ($23 billion in deposits).[23] As yet there are no studies that indicate the scale or distribution of 'informal' microfinance organizations like ROSCA's and informal associations that help people manage costs like weddings, funerals and sickness. Numerous case studies have been published however, indicating that these organizations, which are generally designed and managed by poor people themselves with little outside help, operate in most countries in the developing world.
[24]
Help can come in the form of more and better qualified staff, thus higher education is needed for microfinance institutions. This has begun in some universities, as Oliver Schmidt describes. Mind the management gap
three decades; others, like the Gamelan Council, address larger regions. They have proven very innovative, pioneering banking techniques like solidarity lending, village banking and mobile banking that have overcome barriers to serving poor populations. However, with boards that dont necessarily represent either their capital or their customers, their governance structures can be fragile, and they can become overly dependent on external donors. Formal financial institutions In addition to commercial banks, these include state banks, agricultural development banks, savings banks, rural banks and non-bank financial institutions. They are regulated and supervised, offer a wider range of financial services, and control a branch network that can extend across the country and internationally. However, they have proved reluctant to adopt social missions, and due to their high costs of operation, often can't deliver services to poor or remote populations. The increasing use of alternative data in credit scoring, such as trade credit is increasing commercial banks' interest in microfinance.[27] With appropriate regulation and supervision, each of these institutional types can bring leverage to solving the microfinance problem. For example, efforts are being made to link self-help groups to commercial banks, to network member-owned organizations together to achieve economies of scale and scope, and to support efforts by commercial banks to 'downscale' by integrating mobile banking and e-payment technologies into their extensive branch networks.
Philippines. The results of this study suggest that many of the benefits from microcredit are in fact loaned to people with existing business, and not to those seeking to establish new businesses. Many of those receiving microcredit also used the loans to supplement the family income. The income that went up in business was true only for men, and not for women. This is striking because one of the supposed major beneficiaries of microfinance is supposed to be targeted at women. Professor Karlan's conclusion was that whilst microcredit is not necessarily bad and can generate some positive benefits, despite some lenders charging interest rates between 40-60%, it isn't the panacea that it is purported to be. He advocates rather than focusing strictly on microcredit, also giving citizens in poor countries access to rudimentary and cheap savings accounts.[33] To further the point stated by Prof Karlan, microfinancing begets the general tendency of a small business initially supported on credit to gain profits with time and generate micro savings. In his latest study, the famous two time pulitzer prize winner, Nicholas Donabet Kristof states that there is no evidence of any negative influence of micro financing but countless examples of people now looking at the bigger picture and saving for better things have surfaced. The example of BancoSol(Bolivia), where the number of savers has grown to twice as much as the number of borrowers, further strengthens his theory.[34][35] Sociologist Jon Westover found that much of the evidence on the effectiveness of microfinance for alleviating poverty is based in anecdotal reports or case studies. He initially found over 100 articles on the subject, but included only the 6 which used enough quantitative data to be representative, and none of which employed rigorous methods such as randomized control trials similar to those reported by Innovations for Poverty Action and the M.I.T. Jameel Poverty Action Lab. One of these studies found that microfinance reduced poverty. Two others were unable to conclude that microfinance reduced poverty, although they attributed some positive effects to the program. Other studies concluded similarly, with surveys finding that a majority of participants feel better about finances with some feeling worse.[36]
voluntarily submitted reports to the MicroBanking Bulletin in 2006 was 22.3% annually. However, annual rates charged to clients are higher, as they also include local inflation and the bad debt expenses of the microfinance institution.[40] Muhammad Yunus has recently made much of this point, and in his latest book[41] argues that microfinance institutions that charge more than 15% above their long-term operating costs should face penalties. Milford Bateman, the author of Why Doesn't Microfinance Work?, argues that microcredit offers only an "illusion of poverty reduction". "As in any lottery or game of chance, a few in poverty do manage to establish microenterprises that produce a decent living," he argues, but "these isolated and often temporary positives are swamped by the largely overlooked negatives." Bateman concludes that "The international development community is now faced with the reality that, overall, microfinance has been a development policy blunder of quite historic proportions."[42] Here Bateman, like many writers, confuses microfinance as a broad sector with microcredit, a single microfinance intervention (see delineation above). The role of donors has also been questioned. The Consultative Group to Assist the Poor (CGAP) recently commented that "a large proportion of the money they spend is not effective, either because it gets hung up in unsuccessful and often complicated funding mechanisms (for example, a government apex facility), or it goes to partners that are not held accountable for performance. In some cases, poorly conceived programs have retarded the development of inclusive financial systems by distorting markets and displacing domestic commercial initiatives with cheap or free money."[43] There has also been criticism of microlenders for not taking more responsibility for the working conditions of poor households, particularly when borrowers become quasi-wage labourers, selling crafts or agricultural produce through an organization controlled by the MFI. The desire of MFIs to help their borrower diversify and increase their incomes has sparked this type of relationship in several countries, most notably Bangladesh, where hundreds of thousands of borrowers effectively work as wage labourers for the marketing subsidiaries of Grameen Bank or BRAC. Critics maintain that there are few if any rules or standards in these cases governing working hours, holidays, working conditions, safety or child labour, and few inspection regimes to correct abuses.[44] Some of these concerns have been taken up by unions and socially responsible investment advocates. For example, BusinessWeek reported that some Mexicans are stumbling with terms of newly available funding.[45][46] Other criticism was raised by the IPO (Initial Public Offering) of a Mexican MFI Banco Compartamos in 2007. As the company put its shares on Mexican Stock Exchange it was able to generate very high profits that were achieved by rising interest rates on their micro-loans that at some point reached 86% per year.[47] In July 2010 India's biggest MFI, SKS Microfinance also went public. In both instances Muhammad Yunus publicly stated his disagreement, saying that the poor should be the only beneficiaries of microfinance.[48][49] Microcredit has been blamed for many suicides in India: aggressive lending by microcredit companies in Andra Pradesh is said to have resulted in over 80 deaths in 2010.[50] Some alleged problems with microcredit are documented in a film of the Danish journalist Tom Heinemann which was shown on Norwegian National Television in December 2010 and in Danish National Television January 31, 2011.[51] In 1997 the Norwegian authorities discovered that 608 million kroner (US$ 100 Million approximately) aid from Norway and other countries contributed to the Grameen Bank was being diverted by Mohammed Yunus and his closest associates to a company that was engaged in an entirely different sector. When the Norwegian Embassy raised the alarm about the relationship in 1998, more than 50 million aid money had already been transferred to the For-Profit company Grameen Phone in
which Norways Telenor is the largest shareholder. The whole matter had been kept a secret until now. The Norwegian Foreign Affairs committee in Norways Parliament has reacted strongly to the information presented in the documentary and under a third of the missing money was later returned to the original account. Mohammed Yunus mention in his letters to his closest associates that the reason for the transfer was to not pay tax. Most of the money are still missing or not accounted for. The film reports that money was set aside by the very most central person of microloans establishing a secret company in order to not pay tax, evidenced with letters written by himself.[52] The film also documents that when Hillary Clinton visited a village in Bangladesh, women from outside were transported into the village and out of the 50 to 80 people in the village who had received microloans, none were ever asked for their views regarding microloans. Only 3 or 4 of the people in the village had been able to successfully build a house using microloans and at least one man in the village considered attempting suicide. The film suggests that the house which Hillary Clinton was shown as an example of microloan success was actually a house uninvolved with any microloan. The Danish journalist travelled to Mexico, Nigeria, India and Bangladesh, even visiting the same places following a 2-year interval, and found the same results, namely that the majority of people got worse because of the high interest rates and mafia-like ways of collecting interest payments from the poor. The film interviewed the mother of a girl who lit herself on fire to commit suicide after her sewing machine was repossessed. The documentary film maker Tom Heinemann, also revealed that Prof Mohammed Yunus refused to speak to him during the making of the documentary despite repeated attempts to get his version of the story. The documentary also looks at the effectiveness of Grameen Bank along with its "miraculous" stories of transforming peoples lives and concludes that it has had little impact on poverty in all these years. In one segment Heinemann visits the home of the celebrated original grameen loan-taker Sufiya Begum in Jobra village. Celebrated in grameen folklore that is. He finds some very uncomfortable stories and comes to know that she died in poverty and all her daughters today are beggars. This story is disputed, since documentary maker Gayle Ferraro found the woman alive and well, confirming the original Grameen story.[53] Documentary broadcasting in the Danish Radio DR also documented that people receiving microloan often end in a spiral of debt [54] because the interest rate often is 100% a year.[55]
[edit] Bibliography
Adams, Dale W., Douglas H. Graham & J. D. Von Pischke (eds.). Undermining Rural Development with Cheap Credit. Westview Press, Boulder & London, 1984. de Aghion, Beatriz Armendriz & Jonathan Morduch. The Economics of Microfinance, The MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 2005. Branch, Brian & Janette Klaehn. Striking the Balance in Microfinance: A Practical Guide to Mobilizing Savings. PACT Publications, Washington, 2002. Christen, Robert Peck, Jayadeva, Veena & Richard Rosenberg. Financial Institutions with a Double Bottom Line. Consultative Group to Assist the Poor, Washington 2004. Dichter, Thomas and Malcolm Harper (eds). Whats Wrong with Microfinance? Practical Action, 2007. Dowla, Asif & Dipal Barua. The Poor Always Pay Back: The Grameen II Story. Kumarian Press Inc., Bloomfield, Connecticut, 2006. Gibbons, David. The Grameen Reader. Grameen Bank, Dhaka, 1992.
Helms, Brigit. Access for All: Building Inclusive Financial Systems. Consultative Group to Assist the Poor, Washington, 2006. Hirschland, Madeline (ed.) Savings Services for the Poor: An Operational Guide. Kumarian Press Inc., Bloomfield CT, 2005. Khandker, Shahidur R. Fighting Poverty with Microcredit, Bangladesh edition, The University Press Ltd, Dhaka, 1999. Ledgerwood, Joanna and Victoria White. Transforming Microfinance Institutions: Providing Full Financial Services to the Poor. World Bank, 2006. Mas, Ignacio and Kabir Kumar. Banking on mobiles: why, how and for whom? CGAP Focus Note #48, July, 2008. Raiffeisen, FW (translated from the German by Konrad Engelmann). The Credit Unions. The Raiffeisen Printing & Publishing Company, Neuwied on the Rhine, Germany, 1970. Rutherford, Stuart. The Poor and Their Money. Oxford University Press, Delhi, 2000. Wolff, Henry W. Peoples Banks: A Record of Social and Economic Success. P.S. King & Son, London, 1910. Sapovadia, Vrajlal K., Micro Finance: The Pillars of a Tool to Socio-Economic Development. Development Gateway, 2006. Maimbo, Samuel Munzele & Dilip Ratha (eds.) Remittances: Development Impact and Future Prospects. The World Bank, 2005. Wright, Graham A.N. Microfinance Systems: Designing Quality Financial Services for the Poor. The University Press, Dhaka, 2000. United Nations Department of Economic Affairs and United Nations Capital Development Fund. Building Inclusive Financial Sectors for Development. United Nations, New York, 2006. Yunus, Muhammad. Creating a World Without Poverty: Social Business and the Future of Capitalism. PublicAffairs, New York, 2008.micro finance is a not suceses in all country such like india poor farmers die due to non payment of the loan taken from such micro finance compony,from his fear poor farmers choos the way of death.
Alternative data Bank Credit union Crowd funding Microcredit Microfinance in Tanzania Microinsurance Microfinance organizations Opportunity finance Pawnbroker
[edit] Notes
1. ^ Robert Peck Christen, Richard Rosenberg & Veena Jayadeva. Financial institutions
with a double-bottom line: implications for the future of microfinance. CGAP Occasional Paper, July 2004, pp. 2-3.
2. ^ Feigenberg, Benjamin; Erica M. Field, Rohini Pande. Building Social Capital
Through MicroFinance. NBER Working Paper No. 16018. http://www.nber.org/papers/w16018. Retrieved 10 March 2011.
3. ^ Hernando de Soto. The Other Path: The Invisible Revolution in the Third World.
Rural Development with Cheap Credit. Westview Press, Boulder & London, 1984.
5. ^ Marguerite Robinson. The Microfinance Revolution: Sustainable Finance for the
outreach, profitability and poverty, Consultative Group to Assist the Poor, 2006.
14. ^ Microfinance Information Exchange, Inc. (2007-08-01). "MicroBanking Bulletin
Issue #15, Autumn, 2007, pp. 46,49". Microfinance Information Exchange, Inc.. http://www.themix.org/microbanking-bulletin/mbb-issue-no-15-autumn-2007. Retrieved 2010-01-15.
15. ^ McKenzie, David (2008-10-17). "Comments Made at IPA/FAI Microfinance
20. ^ Robert Peck Christen, Richard Rosenberg & Veena Jayadeva. Financial institutions
with a double-bottom line: implications for the future of microfinance. CGAP Occasional Paper, July 2004.
21. ^ MFW4A - Microfinance (2010-11-05). "MFW4A - Microfinance".
http://www.mfw4a.org/access-to-finance/microfinance.html.
22. ^ Christen, Rosenberg & Jayadeva. Financial institutions with a double-bottom line,
pp. 5-6
23. ^ Microfinance Information Exchange, Inc. (2009-12-01). "MicroBanking Bulletin
Issue #19, December, 2009, pp. 49". Microfinance Information Exchange, Inc.. http://www.themix.org/microbanking-bulletin/mbb-issue-no-19-december-2009.
24. ^ See for example Joachim de Weerdt, Stefan Dercon, Tessa Bold and Alula
Pankhurst, Membership-based indigenous insurance associations in Ethiopia and Tanzania For other cases see ROSCA.
25. ^ Brigit Helms. Access for All: Building Inclusive Financial Systems. CGAP/World
Microfinance an Effective Strategy to Reach the Millennium Development Goals?" (PDF). FocusNote (Consultative Group to Assist the Poor) (24). Archived from the original on 2007-02-03. http://web.archive.org/web/20070203045104/http://www.cgap.org/docs/FocusNote_2 4.pdf. Retrieved 2007-03-27.
32. ^ Morduch, Jonathan (2008-10-17). "Comments Made at IPA/FAI Microfinance
2011-03-25.
34. ^ Kristof, Nicholas (2009-12-28). "The Role of Microfinance". The New York Times.
http://kristof.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/12/28/the-role-of-microfinance/.
35. ^ "Reply to Nicholas Kristof: Microcredit, microsavings? Microfinance. ".
A., et al. (2007). Understanding the impact of a microfinance-based intervention of women's empowerment and the reduction of intimate partner violence in South Africa. American Journal of Public Health.
38. ^ Stephen C. Smith, "Village Banking and Maternal and Child Health: Evidence from
Ecuador and Honduras," World Development, 30, 4, 707 723, April 2002
39. ^ Karlan D, Valdivia M. (2009). Teaching Entrepreneurship: Impact of Business
Training on Microfinance Clients and Institutions. Forthcoming March 2010, Review of Economics and Statistics.
40. ^ Microfinance Information Exchange, Inc. (2007-08-01). "MicroBanking Bulletin
Issue #15, Autumn, 2007, pp. 48". Microfinance Information Exchange, Inc.. http://www.themix.org/microbanking-bulletin/mbb-issue-no-15-autumn-2007.
41. ^ Muhammad Yunus and Karl Weber. Creating a World Without Poverty: Social
http://www.redpepper.org.uk/the-illusion-of-poverty-reduction.
43. ^ Brigit Helms. Access for All: Building Inclusive Financial Systems. CGAP/World
Offering" http://www.cgap.org/p/site/c/template.rc/1.26.4905/
48. ^ Businessweek, "Online Extra: Yunus Blasts Compartamos"
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/07_52/b4064045920958.htm
49. ^ ABCNews, SKS Launches India's First Microfinance IPO
http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory?id=11270209
50. ^ "India's micro-finance suicide epidemic". BBC News. 2010-12-16.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-11997571.
51. ^ "Tom Heinemann: "Fanget i Mikrogld"". Dr.dk.
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microfinance" Categories: Development | Microfinance | Poverty | Social economy Hidden categories: Wikipedia articles that are too technical from January 2010 | Articles needing expert attention from January 2010 | All articles with unsourced statements | Articles with unsourced statements from March 2009 | Articles with unsourced statements from October 2010 | Articles with unsourced statements from June 2010 | Articles with unsourced statements from October 2009 | Articles with unsourced statements from September 2010
Personal tools
Views
Namespaces
Variants
Actions Search
Top of Form
Special:Search
Bottom of Form
Navigation
Main page Contents Featured content Current events Random article Donate to Wikipedia
Interaction
Toolbox
Help About Wikipedia Community portal Recent changes Contact Wikipedia What links here Related changes Upload file Special pages Permanent link Cite this page Create a book Download as PDF Printable version esky Dansk Deutsch Espaol Franais Italiano Nederlands Norsk (bokml) Polski Svenska Trke This page was last modified on 5 June 2011 at 20:17. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. See Terms of Use for details.
Print/export
Languages