MicroCapital Paper Review: “Great Expectations: Microfinance and Poverty Reduction in Asia and Latin America”

To access this article visit: “Great Expectations: Microfinance and Poverty Reduction in Asia and Latin America”

Authors: John Weiss and Heather Montgomery

Published by: Asian Development Bank Institute, September 2004

Quantitative Information: This article compares the development and status of microfinance within two regions: Asia and Latin America. The authors suggest Asia is more effective at reaching the poor, whereas Latin America is more advanced in developing microenterprise åö using the average loan balance per borrower of US$581 in Latin America versus US$195 in Asia to back their argument. Moreover, the article cites a Mix Market, a World Bank information clearing house on microfinance, report that only 10% of Latin American MFIs specified that they were targeting “very poor clients.”

Qualitative Information: Introduced as evolving for different purposes, microfinance within Latin America åö initially having a greater focus on commercial profitability åö is contrasted against Asia and the ideals of the Grameen Bank, a famous Bangladeshi microfinance institution (MFI). The authors propose that although NGOs are still important players within Latin America, there is a significant trend toward the commercialization of microfinance and thus MFIs’ focus on profitability. The article suggests that rural, impoverished regions particularly within larger countries such as Brazil, Mexico, and Argentina are under-addressed, but neither provides examples to support these statements nor distinguishes the types of MFIs and their target markets. While the authors agree that there are indications that MFIs have an impact on borrowers within Latin America, MFIs remain unsuccessful at reaching the poorest åö although they offer little propositions for MFIs to both achieve profitability and successfully touch the pooråÐest. They do, however, suggest more studies are needed on the impact and cost effectiveness of microfinance programs.

Dr. Yunus Goes Big Time while his US Spin-off Announces $50 Million Guarantee Fund for Microfinance Investment

Dr. Yunus, founder of Grameen Bank, a Bangladeshi microbank, sat down with the likes of Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, Prime Minister Tony Blair, Secretary General KofÌÐ Annan, World Bank Group President Paul Wolfowitz, and Omidyar Network founder Pierre Omidyar at Clinton’s Global Summit. The Grameen Foundation USA (GFUSA), a non-profit spin-off of Dr. Yunus’ Bangladeshi microbank, took the opportunity to announce the launch of its $50 million guarantee fund, $5 million of which is already committed by Ms. McKinley, a California philanthropist who made her money as the director of Capital Research and Management Company. GFUSA seeks to hit its $50 million target within the next year.

Additional Resources

1)
“Clinton Global Initiative.”
2) “New Fund Featured in Clinton Global Initiative Book Offers up to $50 million to Guarantee Microfinance Loans for the Poor.”
3) “California Couple Donates $10 Million to Combat Poverty Around the World.”
4) “Insight 15: Bridging the Finance Gap: ACCION’s Experience with Guarantee Funds for Microfinance Institutions.”
5)
IFC Supports Financiera Compartamos Bond Issue in Mexico through Partial Credit Guarantee First Investment Grade Bond Issue to Finance Microfinance Activities in Mexico.”
6) Microcredit Development Fund Helps Transform Household Scraps into Sustainable Entrepreneurship.”

How Does More Paperwork Help?

"El Financiero," a Mexican Finance newspaper, tells a story where, at first, all is bright for our hero microfinance: the Mexican government representatives talk of poverty reduction and the displacement of loan sharks. These loans are really working! The story then crescendos: the situation is so good for these micro-businesses that the Mexican government now plans to establish "The Fast Opening Business System," a new government program to help all the poor micro-entrepreneurs register their businesses formally. Does this mean greater regulatory burden for all those struggling to make ends meet?

A point of explanation is needed: people from the developed world often assume that micro-enterprises are new ‘start-ups,’ but such is not the case. Due to the dearth of formal jobs in the developing world, most people are self-employed, and have always been self-employed. So, the Mexican government is not making it easier for common folks to ‘open’ a business as the catchy name of their new bureau implies. Instead, the government seeks the registration of businesses that micro-entrepreneurs have been running for years to feed their families.

Is there something in this for the micro-business owners other than new taxes, paperwork, and bureaucrats winking for a greased palm?

Of course the formal registration of micro-enterprises should be supported, and of course one of the great benefits of successful microfinance is that it creates wealth, which in turn enlarges the tax base, hopefully helping to stabilize and clean up dreadful governments. However, this should be a natural evolution. Once a micro-enterprise starts to grow, the proprietor has ever-more reasons to formalize her business: i.e. renting commercial space, offering the business as a micro-loan guarantee, or offering benefits to her employees. In this way, the best thing governments can do for new recipients of micro-loans is stay out of the way, not think up new bureaus over U.N. luncheons.

Moreover, plenty of reform of existing legislation is essential if microfinance is to reach its potential, such as streamlining red tape for all businesses. The article ends on yet another gloomy note. Amidst the excitement of the U.N. meeting, an attending government official generously offers the important participation of his particular bureau, adding that more government programs should get involved!

Again and again, we are reminded of how the domination of microfinance by charities and governments harm micro-banks and their clients. Only business-people sitting at the table can change this dynamic.

Below is a list of the most promising forms government activity can take in the field of microfinance:

1) Don’t place ceilings on interest rates
2) Promote the concept of microfinance as a crucial means to resolve poverty
3) Adapt
existing legislation rather than promulgate new laws
4) Eliminate unfair competition from public institutions, which often loan at below market-level interest rates
5) Actively work to improve and stabilize the business environment and general macroeconomic situation (benefits include reducing interest rates to make more capital available, stabilizing interest and exchange rates, improving infrastructure)
6) Scale-up microfinance by integrating it with the formal financial sector (benefits include economies of scale, risk management expertise, physical infrastructure and branch networks, and information, administrative and accounting systems)
7) Encourage commercial entry into the financial sector by reducing high reserve requirements to increase available capital
8)
Non-prudential regulation
9)Encourage a diversified environment of regulated and unregulated institutions that meet performance standards
10) Develop transparency and performance standards

Additional Resources

1) Main article discussed in entry, El Financiero: "Viables."
2) Consultative Group to Assist the Poor (CGAP): "The Impact of Interest Rate Ceilings on Microfinance"
3) Women’s World Banking (WWB):
"Policies, Regulations and Systems that Promote Sustainable Financial Services to the Poor and Poorest"
4)
"Impact of Government Regulation on Microfinance"
5) CGAP:
"Guiding Principles on Regulation and Supervision of Microfinance"
6
) "Regulatory Requirements for Microfinance: a Comparison of Legal Frameworks in 11 Countries Worldwide"