Please note - this is a temporary window. id21 is joining forces with Eldis and therefore the id21 website has been suspended. Soon all id21 content will be available on the Eldis website.
Formal microcredit schemes include small loans given to people unable to obtain credit from banks. These schemes are increasingly popular in Bangladesh as an alternative to bank loans, but do they reach the most suitable borrowers?
For a long time, many smallholders in developing countries have been unable to access credit from banks. This is mainly because of the high fees charged on each loan and the difficulties that banks experience in identifying the borrowers most likely to repay loans. Information gaps are another problem; because there is little lending to smallholders, banks do not have enough information to identify the best ways to select those smallholders most likely to succeed.
People lending money through formal microcredit schemes face similar problems to banks in identifying which people are likely to succeed in their projects. Because of these problems, many formal attempts to provide cheap credit to smallholder farmers have failed.
By contrast, informal lenders are usually based within a community. This gives them an advantage in selecting the borrowers most likely to be successful. As a result, they are able to charge higher interest rates on the loans they provide. Despite being more expensive, informal micro-lending continues to be popular. This suggests that it provides an important service to smallholders.
Research from the International Institute for Environment and Development, in the UK, compares the formal and informal microcredit schemes used by Bangladeshi shrimp farmers. Improving access to credit will make many tasks easier for rural poor people in Bangladesh, for example difficulties in buying supplies. This will reduce poverty amongst people dependent on the shrimp export industry.
The research shows:
Although formal microcredit schemes avoid the problem that banks face of high administrative fees, they do not solve the problem of how to select successful borrowers. Informal lenders have better information on individual borrowers than formal lenders. This makes them more likely to select the most suitable borrowers. For formal microcredit schemes to succeed, formal lenders need to find ways to access this information.
The researchers conclude:
Source(s):
‘Giving Credit to the Microlenders: Formal Microlending, Credit
Constraints and Adverse Selection – a Case Study of Shrimp Farmers in
Bangladesh’, Environmental Economics Programme Discussion Paper 08-02,
International Institute for Environment and Development: IIED, by Camilla
Andersson, Erik Holmgren, James MacGregor and Jesper Stage, 2008 (PDF) Full document.
Funded by: Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (Sida); Jan Wallander and Tom Hedelius Foundation; Länsförsäkringar Research Foundation; Royal Danish Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Danida)
id21 Research Highlight: 5 April 2008
Further Information:
James MacGregor
Senior Researcher
Environmental Economics Programme
International Institute for Environment and Development
3 Endsleigh Street
London WC1H 0DD
UK
Tel:
+44 20 73882117
Fax:
+44 20 73882826
Contact the contributor: james.macgregor@iied.org
Other related links:
'Microcredit: killer weapon in the fight against poverty?'
'Innovations in microfinance: new product development in Bangladesh'
'Fine tuning microfinance: better financial systems for the poor'