microfinance, (only) for enterprising people? a diverse ... · 5. microfinance for enterprising...
TRANSCRIPT
Lectoraat Microfinance and Small Enterprise Development
www.INHolland.nl/Microfinanciering
Microfinance, (only) for enterprising people? ... a diverse market requires a novel approach ...
Drs. Klaas Molenaar
Mircofinance, (only) for enterprising people?
…… a diverse market requires a novel approach …..
Drs. Klaas Molenaar
Met dank aan Spresso voor het gebruik van de foto op de omslag.
Copyright © 2008 Hogeschool INHolland
Alle rechten voorbehouden. Niets van deze uitgave mag worden vermenigvuldigd,
opgeslagen in een geautomatiseerd gegevensbestand, of openbaar gemaakt, in
enige vorm of op enige wijze, hetzij elektronisch, mechanisch, door fotokopieën,
opname of op enige andere manier, zonder vooraf schriftelijke toestemming van de
uitgever: Hogeschool INHolland.
In so far as reproduction of this publication is permitted, based on art. 16b and 17 of
the Dutch Copyright Act 1912, legal rights must be paid to Stichting Reprorecht,
Postbus 882, 1180 AW Amstelveen. For the use of one or several parts of this
publication for an anthology, a reader or other works of compilation the publisher
must be contacted.
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval
system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, mechanical, photocopying,
recording or otherwise, without prior permission of the publisher.
ISBN/EAN: 978-90-77812-25-9
Publication with the speech
delivered by drs. Klaas Molenaar for
his accession to the office of lector
at the research group Microfinance and Small
Enterprise Development
at the INHolland University of Applied Research
in Haarlem, on 27 November 2008.
4
5
Content
1. There is a wealth of experience out there; it is not all new,
still developments are... 12
1.1. Evaluations and theory as a basis for the start and growth of
microcredit 13
1.2. Can we compare developments and draw lessons? 17
2. Microcredit for the poor evolving into microfinance for the
self-employed and micro entrepreneurs? 22
2.1. Microfinance, from beating poverty to sustainable organisations
and sustainable borrowers? 23
i. Microcredit for the talented poor... 23
ii. Microfinance and macro economic development...
the chicken and the egg?... 24
iii. Microfinance for the creation of jobs and enterprises... 26
iv. Sustainability for whom? 27
2.2. Policies in support of the clients or the organisations? 31
2.3. NGOs becoming NBFIs or even banks in search for new client groups 34
2.4. From social services to servicing enterprises… 36
i. From credit for all poor to loans for (selected) entrepreneurs... 36
ii. From group-based approaches to individualised services 37
iii. From finance to revival of bds services? 40
3. How green are the pastures in Europe? 42
3.1. Enterprise development or social inclusion? 42
3.2. Mismatch between mission(s) and practice 46
3.3. A large number of organisations, but only a few are actively engaged 48
3.4. So many services, and yet the primary focus is on smes 50
i. Clients are mainly the self-employed and the
micro-/small entrepreneur 50
ii. Service packages mainly geared for small and micro
enterprises 52
6
iii. Other financial services coming up 53
iv. Business support services widely accepted 53
4. Is there a future for microfinance in the Netherlands? 55
4.1. Awareness of many problems, but more choices need to be made 55
i. National council for microfinance boosts awareness 55
ii. Unexplored segments in the market 57
4.2. Policy mainly focused on micro-enterprises and not yet imbedded. 60
4.3. There are many banks out there but no microfinance institutions... 62
4.4. Microfinance services not yet tailored to new groups in the market 65
4.5. Searching for know-how across borders 66
5. Microfinance for enterprising people: new markets demand changes
in thinking 71
5.1. There might be something wrong in logic 72
5.2. Microfinance channels, enterprising people and the socially excluded,
new choices to make 75
i. The self-employed in need for appropriate
microfinance (institutions) 76
ii. The enterprising economic and socially excluded call for
innovative approaches 78
5.3 Can the reversed path south to north become a circular process? 79
Reference literature 82
7
Microcredit, microfinance and enterprising people
“….. there is only the viability of people: people, actual persons like you and me, are
viable when they can stand on their own feet and earn their keep…”
E.F. Schumacher” 19731
A lot is being written about microcredit and microfinance. Suddenly it was there. It
has been widely embraced and subsequently grown into visibility. One major lesson
can be drawn from experience in developing countries (the South) microcredit is
extremely useful for the poor and microfinance is a proper tool for enterprising
people. And the question may be raised whether it will be a proper instrument in the
Netherlands as well and if so whether we have a clear view of whom to serve, what
products to offer and which channels to choose to reach that market.
Microfinance has been widely accepted as an effective tool in the development
sector. There are few politicians who will deny that. A close look shows that an
impressive number of poor people, often women, are being aided with microcredit.
They make use of the small loans granted to them in various ways. Subsequently,
professionals and practitioners claim success in poverty alleviation. With microcredit
now evolved into microfinance, they even claim that it boosts enterprise development
and business creation. Microcredit and microfinance have become visible and
attract all kinds of attention: from those who see it as the solution to beat poverty,
from researchers who question its effectiveness, from enterprising people intending
to make a living with it through their own microfinance institutions (MFIs) and from
investors hoping to make money in this industry. There are many reasons to
become part of this sector, to support the movement and to be able to say that you
are involved.
The movement has become a sector in itself in many developing countries and a
successful one at that. This message has been sent across borders worldwide. It
has also reached our country, and we are in the fortunate position that politicians
1 , a truth still true….. Schumacher, E. F. (1973). Small is Beautiful, A Study of Economics as if People Mattered, Blond and Briggs. Page 65
8
and opinion leaders have embraced it. People in the Netherlands talk about
microfinance and want to launch such programmes. It might be a hype embraced
by politicians with short-termvision, but hopefully it can become a tool for structural
development.
In developing countries the market for microfinance seems quite logical and easy to
operate in: there are poor, socially excluded people without access to regular
banking services and if they have proper access they will initiate economic activities
that will generate decent work and income for them. And, those people are best
served by Non Governmental Organisations (NGOs) and Non Bank Financial
Institutions (NBFIs) that propose the new services on a large scale and that will
become self-sustainable by generating sufficient income to offset the relative high
cost of their operations…… Nothing wrong with that at first sight. But a closer look
at development across borders teaches us that the situation is quite different. The
market is not as homogeneous as we assume. There are indeed many people who
wish to participate more actively in our society either socially or economically. They
need microloans and other financial services. But not all of them intend to set up
businesses, nor do they aspire to becoming an entrepreneur. Still there are others
with entrepreneurial attitudes who want to set up a micro-enterprise, and others yet
who wish to be self-employed during a given period in their economic active life.
They form new segments in the markets attended more by specialised microfinance
banks and the (mature) NBFIs.
We see microfinance institutions in developing countries gradually shift attention to
entrepreneurship development - with the enterprising self-employed and micro-
entrepreneurs as their prime client, and we subsequently note that poor, excluded
people are (again) left aside.
If we wish to make use of microfinance in the Netherlands, are we then aiming at
assisting the socially excluded, reacting to the needs of the new self-employed or
still following traditional patterns with business start-up programmes? In a 2007
study Triodos Facet already reported (Triodos Facet 2007) that there is a tendency
in the Netherlands to focus mainly on the financial support of starting micro-
enterprise development. The systems in place (both financing through the regular
9
banks and training and coaching systems) are more appropriate for enterprise
development. And the question arises whether that is sufficient.
No clear ideas exist as yet about how to develop microfinance for the self-employed
or microcredit for those who just want to start an economic activity that will not only
generate additional income but also induce social participation by economic
activities. Many enterprising people expect us to come up with proper services, but
no clear choices have been made between the two (microcredit and microfinance)
in the policy nor do we have a clear picture of the institutions we need to reach, the
various clients or target groups and of the products to propose. We may ask
ourselves how to do that and what can be learned from others.
In developing countries microcredit and microfinance have evolved logically over
two decades now. People involved know in which direction to go. Lessons have
been learned and principles have been formulated and widely accepted2 in both.
We still lag behind in understanding the differences and in knowing what to do. And
it is precisely this lagging behind that we can turn around to our advantage, based
on a process of reversed knowledge transfer from developing countries (the South)
to the North. It may shed light on the question whom to target and which channels
to choose.
I strongly believe that we can learn from experience abroad if we manage to
systematise such experiences and understand the conditions under which they are
effective. The lessons learned need to be blended with our insight into developing
systems, methods and technologies appropriate for our society. That belief is the
foundation for the programmes of the Lectoraat Microfinanciering en
Kleinbedrijfontwikkeing (Research group Microfinance and small enterprise
development of INHolland University of Applied Sciences and our Centre for
Microfinance INHolland).
We need to ask why microcredit and microfinance are promoted, what policy is
pursued, what institutional and organisational set-up is needed and which services
are effective and in demand. Additionally we may ask whether any consistency
2 See for instance the “Key principles of Microfinance” as accepted by the G8 in 2004 during the Heads of State meeting on Sea Island, Geogia, USA.
10
exists between the awareness that microfinance is needed, the policies put in place,
the institutions operating in the sector and the products and services developed and
introduced3.
Over the past decade a growing number of papers, articles and books have been
published about microfinance with most publications dealing with the development
in the South. Know-how and experience are gradually being systematised and this
body of knowledge can be helpful in us. Still in the course of time I have come to
understand that many things we believe and say about microcredit and microfinance
are difficult to prove and substantiate.
Academics have not yet linked on sufficiently. Our knowledge about microfinance
and microcredit is practice-based and will remain so. Still we could well do with
some more underlying theoretical frameworks to avoid that we start following trends
and hypes without clearly specifying what we wish to achieve. At INHolland we wish
to make that contribution by critically questioning common beliefs and how things
are done in our research activities. We will plough back through the practice-based
knowledge now at hand into formal education as well, offering students the
opportunity to become well-trained - and critical - professionals in microfinance. The
future professionals will be challenged to broaden our understanding and deepen
our knowledge about microfinance.
In the following chapters I will assess the evolution and development of microcredit
and microfinance in developing countries (chapter 2), in Europe (chapter 3) and the
Netherlands (chapter 4). The four elements, awareness, policy, institutions and
services, will be discussed in each chapter separately.
Comparing the developments in those three different “worlds” will help us to
understand in which direction microfinance and microcredit can evolve in our
society. And it will provide us with a framework for future research to be undertaken
by INHolland preferably in cooperation with other research centres and more
importantly, with practitioners.
3 This line of thinking is based on the APIS model Molenaar, N. (2005). Institutional development based on the APIS Model.
11
That way we intend to contribute to this broader and deepened understanding of
microfinance across our own borders and will make an effort to create a circular
process of transfer of experiences and know-how. The ideas presented here are
such a contribution and definitely subject to debate and critique.
12
1. There is a wealth of experience out there; it is not all new, still developments are...
The microcredit and microfinance industry would not have developed so rapidly if
both had not been supported by in-depth insight in the small- and micro-enterprise
sector at large and the theories developed in the late eighties. Rarely do we see
development processes being supported by a well-founded theory, but the
microfinance sector is one of them. The start and growth of the sector with the
launch of many, fast growing microcredit programmes for the poor was based on a
theoretical framework and a strong awareness that something needed to be done
about the plight of the poor. What first started in developing countries gained ground
in European countries as well, with the Netherlands following only a few years ago.
Comparisons are difficult to make, but they do demonstrate that matching client
groups and services/ channels deserves more attention, not in the least to continue
serving the financially weak in our society. Setting the millennium development
goals and the International Year of Microcredit, and awarding the Nobel Peace
Prize to Mohamed Yunus definitely boosted microfinance enormously worldwide, as
it did in the Netherlands, too. Initially, most developing countries accepted
microfinance as an instrument to combat poverty. Then it was acclaimed as an
instrument to boost entrepreneurial initiatives. Subsequently, MFIs developed
comprehensive programmes offering a wider range of products and services to
micro-entrepreneurs. Now, the sector is considered an industry, and legalisation
and regulatory frameworks have been developed and introduced in support of the
sector. However, in spite of the interest shown, such is not the case in Europe
yet.
Microfinance is not really something novel. It is not something invented in the
eighties nor was its foundation laid in Bangladesh. This being said it does not
preclude that we need to have tremendous respect for people like Mohamed Yunus
in Bangla Desh or Maria Novak in France, who both gave microfinance a face and
the industry such tremendous impetus. But savings- and credit-groups have existed
for longer periods and were set up by men and women all over the world for many
reasons. SuSu schemes (in Ghana) or Stokvels (in South Africa) existed for longer
13
periods and were set up spontaneously in many places, just like cooperative
savings- and lending groups were in Europe at the beginning of the past century.
The special thing about Yunus was that he demystified the art of banking, believed
in poor people, used existing knowledge and linked that to poverty, and that he saw
microcredit as an instrument to promote social participation and a way for people to
break away from the poverty trap. Similar things happened in the past. In a very
capitalistic and liberal economy, the savings- and credit cooperatives were an
answer to the exploitation of people. It was also understood that the actual users
themselves could not necessarily lead and manage the organisations on their own.
They already had enough on their hands to cope with, and were better off with well-
run financial institutions that offered proper services at the right price. At the
beginning of the past century, it was Friedrich W. Raiffeissen who took steps to
organise poor farmers in credit- and savings cooperatives. He succeeded in
creating awareness for the poor and in showing them a way out of their social
exclusion by organising cooperative savings- and credit groups, both with and for
them. Indeed, there is also an early example of the Rhineland principles where
collective success, consensus and long-term concerns play a dominant role.
Raifeisssen stimulated various stakeholders, such as teachers, leading public
figures and business leaders, to join the cooperatives, and to sit on their boards and
(management and advisory) committees. Thus, he secured social imbedding of the
cooperatives, which in turn contributed to their overall sustainability. However, very
little has been done with this knowledge in the development of microfinance where
self-sustainability still is a determining factor in policy.
1.1 Evaluations and theory as a basis for the start and growth of microcredit
Small and medium-sized enterprises (SME) received ample attention in the
seventies and eighties and many programmes were experimented with. Special
SME financing programmes were developed, as well as training and consultancy
services. Evaluations of SME development programmes in the eighties showed the
limitations of the methods and programmes: they did not reach large numbers of
people, were considered costly and offered all kinds of services to the SME sector
in a supply-driven, ineffective and inefficient way.
14
The comprehensive evaluations4 of the small-scale industries sector in the late
eighties (Keddy, Nanjundan et al. 1988) provide an in-depth insight into the
numerous pitfalls encountered in smalland micro-enterprise development and
promotion programmes. Their studies clearly spell out the weaknesses of the Small
and Medium-sized Enterprises (SME) support systems adopted, programmes
developed and policies pursued. These weaknesses led to supply-focused, often
isolated support, reaching few people at relatively high cost. The lessons drawn
from such analyses are manifold and have an important influence on the design of
micro-enterprise programmes and on the role of related Business Development
Services (BDS). Some of these are:
- The need for an enabling environment that will be conducive to the development
of the micro- and small enterprise sector;
- The importance of involving financial institutions in credit and financing
programmes and the need to think in financial systems rather than in credit lines
proper;
- The importance of professionalising intermediary institutions and organisations
and assisting them in their organisational and related human resources
development processes;
- The importance of boosting and promoting local entrepreneurship resulting in
clear demand for services;
- The need for flexible programmes that can be adjusted to changing needs in the
small and micro-enterprise sector.
The studies conducted by the State University of Michigan on the effectiveness of
small and micro-enterprises and the work of Stewart and others stressed the
importance of focusing on the impact of macro-economic policy for SME
development (Gosses, Molenaar et al. 1989). Governments, it was argued, needed
to concentrate on creating a suitable enabling economic environment and to
withdraw from service-rendering, which should be left to the private sector and
non-governmental organisations (NGOs). This was used by governments as an
4 The most important was organised by United Nations Development Program (UNDP) / Dutch Government / International Labour Organization (ILO) / United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO) thematic evaluation RSIE, Development of Rural Small Industrial Enterprise: Lessons from Experience
15
argument to cut down on allocating funds for the sector. Furthermore, donors
decided to concentrate more on policy issues and less on financing of recurrent
costs for services in SME support programmes. These changes sped up the
process of separating Business Development Services completely from financial
services; in some cases it was even decided to discontinue BDS delivery all
together. But we failed to indicate how these services could then be funded and
financed. With the neo-liberal wave that affected the SME industry in the early
1990’s, it was not surprising to see that BDS services and their institutions
disappeared.5 Lessik and Farbman managed to accelerate the debate by introducing
a pragmatic way to classify the SME sector steering us away from endless definition
debates. They introduced a simple way of describing the sector in four major
categories, survival activities, micro, small and medium-sized enterprises (Gosses,
Molenaar et al. 1989).
Following their work and drawing lessons from the micro-enterprise programmes
under the GEMINI programme6, the minimalistic theory gained ground. The basis of
this theory is quite straightforward: it supposes that the development of micro-
enterprises is hampered by one or two critical factors. Eliminating or reducing the
effects of those factors can have a relatively high effect in the development of the
enterprises. Furthermore, it is argued that (access to) credit is the major bottleneck
in micro-enterprise development. The minimalistic approach has indeed led to an
intensified attention for microcredit programmes.
5 In the Netherlands similar processes took place; look for instance at the history of IMK a state supported BDS provider that went bankrupt after it was partly privatised.
6 A comprehensive USAID funded SME support programme in developing countries, that was studied extensively.
16
Figure 1 Development and evolution trends of organisations offering microfinance
Additional income
generating activities
Self Employed
MicroEnterprise
SmallEnterprise
Medium scale
Enterpris
Non Governenmental Organisation with MC Programme
MFIs
Non Bank Financial institutions
Micro finance banks
General banks
Source: Triodos Facet, based on classification by Farbman and Lessik
Blending this approach with a neo-liberal view contributed strongly to the emergence
of microfinance initiatives. The state and the donors withdrew from support
programmes for the SME sector. People were expected to pay for the services
offered (without further subsidies) and non-governmental organisations (NGOs)
were expected to take over the tasks of the public sector. Besides, donors told
NGOs to become financially sustainable. The NGOs could only do so if they could
offer a product for which people are willing to pay. Microcredit is such a product,
with large numbers of poor women and men willing to pay for it. The market
consisted of poor people who initiated very small economic activities, often
generating some additional income next to other income generated by the
household. With the introduction of microcredit as the single support instrument,
attention shifted dramatically from small and medium enterprise development to the
survival economy, but not yet to the micro-enterprise sector. This came later, when
microcredit evolved into microfinance, when group-based credit distribution systems
evolved into individual lending, new services and products were developed and loan
amounts increased slightly. The next step has been that some NGOs graduated
into Non Bank Financial Institutions (NBFI), which in turn graduated into (quasi-)
banks attending micro and even small entrepreneurs.
17
Following the classification of the sector advocated in the late eighties we can
combine those developments into one framework linking classification with the
channels that emerged over time as presented in figure 1. This can be used to
assess the apparent logical developments and we can ask ourselves whether
developments in Europe at large and in the Netherlands in particular will be similar
and whether there is proper matching between the channels (organisations) and the
target groups. Equally important will be to appraise the markets in which the
microfinance institutions (MFIs) operate, the segmentation of the clients and shifts
that take place in the labour market.
1.2 Can we compare developments and draw lessons?Microcredit and microfinance in developing countries are said to have reached a
large number of clients and significant volumes in lending. Various databases report
so accordingly but unfortunately present different figures, not surprisingly, as we
deal with a significant number of informal operators (both the NGO community and
the clientele). We tend to believe that there are more than 10,000 organisations
worldwide (NGOs and NBFIs, specialised banks but excluding regular banks)
engaged in offering microcredit and microfinance services. There are about 3,000
organisations in a position (or are willing) to submit comprehensive data about their
performance. Based on those data, it is reported that over 300 MFIs are
commercially self-sustainable. Based on the data of MIX (Microfinance Information
eXchange 2007) we estimate that these 3,000 MFIs have approximately
$100 billion worth of outstanding loans and have over 150 million clients7 (of which
over 60% are women) with a growing preference for individual lending (see also
chapter 2).
Many of the NGOs started off as projects with microcredit funds. They applied what
we now label “traditional” methods, such as solidarity loans (group-based) or
gradual lending systems, all methods to extend the very small credits to the poor.
Over time, NGOs became aware that the real issue was access to (a wide range
7 Three - reliable and frequently quoted - sources (Microcredit Summit, CGAP- World Bank and World Savings Banks Institute), give different data but the generally accepted figure fluctuates around 150 million; nevertheless prudence is called for since there is a tendency to overestimate demand in the sector - see also CGAP (2008). “Are we overestimating demand?”
18
of) all-inclusive financial services and the building-up of sustainable financial
intermediaries. They began to offer more services to their clientele and became
non-bank microfinance institutions, some of which nowadays have become
regulated financial intermediaries. As this all appears quite simple, we often seem
to believe that the same could happen (without much modifications or adjustments)
in Europe and the Netherlands.
Microcredit and microfinance in Europe are rather new phenomena and were first
put on the agenda seriously in the early nineties. In a relatively short period both
have been embraced fully by politicians in the European Union - and at some
national levels - as a valuable instrument for social and economic development.
This has culminated in the announcement of a European initiative on microcredit in
2007.
The number of (specialised) MFIs in Europe is rather small (see chapter 3), just
over 200, and the total portfolio of 42,000 to 80,000 loans outstanding is estimated
to range from € 390 to 600 million). Compared to the population in Europe and
moreover the overall amount of outstanding loan amounts, this is rather a low
figure. More interesting are the growth rates and the average loan sizes. The
number of loans disbursed between 2006 and 2007 has increased with 14%, while
the growth rate of the value micro-loans disbursed in Europe between 2006 and
2007 was approximately 32%, with an increase of the average loan size from
€ 7,700 to above € 11,000 (Loans ranging from € 525 -sometimes group-based- in
Eastern / Central Europe mainly to over € 30.000 in Western Europe).
In the Netherlands we are quite late in discovering microfinance. As yet, we have
no significant microcredit programmes in the Netherlands, nor an NGO community
engaged in this work. There are about 12 private organisations8, of which only six
are in the position to report on their performance: Annually they reach approximately
900 clients with individual loans ranging from € 4,000 to over € 31,000 (See
chapter 4). However, we do have clear policy recommendations. The private and
public sector are invited to increase their efforts and mobilise more resources to
8 Data exclude the government sponsored programme for social welfare beneficiaries
19
promote more entrepreneurial initiatives. Furthermore, it sets a challenging target of
an additional 10,000 new starters per annum. While it aims at providing micro-loans
of an average of € 10,000, it also acknowledges the importance of mentoring and
coaching.
Some may label this as a small loans programme aiming to provide finance to
starting (micro-)enterprises; others may claim it is a microfinance programme that
creates more access to finance for those who are normally left aside. What’s in a
name, we may ask.... or is there a need to be more precise?
A deepened and broadened understanding and proper comparisons (illustrated in
Table 1) can indicate how to further develop and introduce microfinance, the
services, which organisations to develop and what policy to pursue.
20
Table 1: Different regions, different developments of the microfinance sector (2007)
Developing
countries
Europe The
Netherlands
Number of NGOs/MFIs
estimated to be operating
fully engaged microcredit/
micro finance9
> 10,000 > 200 ~ 1210
Number of NGOs/MFIs in
position to submit data/
~ 3,000 ~ 100 6
Number of commercially
viable MFIs
~ 300 Not reported
yet
None
Number of active clients > 150 million 42,000 to
80,00011
~ 200
Proportion of female
clients (%)
60 - 65 ~ 44 ~ 32
Total portfolio of loans
outstanding (€)
~ 80 billion
(~ $100 billion)
390 - 600
million
900,000
Range of loans (€) 100 - 850
($145 group
loans - $ 1,150
individual
loans)
545 - over
30,000 (on
average
11,000)
4,000 - 30,000
(on average
13,000 -
15,000)
Proportion of individual
loans (%)
81
(half of which
with group
guarantee
systems)
~ 95 100
9 Excluding banks10 Data Centrum voor Microfinanciering INHolland; corrected by taking out organisations without any
loans and taking out general banks - except for two Municipal Banks; they claim to be sustainable; their microfinance operations are not self sustainable
11 Range influenced by two larger MFIs/ Microfinance banks, i.e.. Fundusz Micro, Poland and Procredrit, both with significant portfolio’s
21
The hard data as such do not tell us much about the way the sector developed. If
we want to develop the sector in the Netherlands we need to be open to study the
phenomenon in detail to find out how awareness is related to policy and which
channels and services are the more appropriate ones for the respective target
groups. In doing so, it can be useful to critically evaluate a number of “common
beliefs and statements”, asking ourselves what we can learn from the South and
how we can use it in the North.
22
2 Microcredit for the poor evolving into microfinance for the self-employed and micro entrepreneurs?
There is no doubt about the many benefits of small loans extended to the poor in
developing countries9; they have indeed been making proper use of this opportunity.
The single instrument - microcredit - has gradually evolved into a microfinance
industry. That development has been gradual and consistent.
First, there was a clear awareness of poverty traps and the possibilities for the poor
to regain self-esteem and participate in society. That was later complemented with
the awareness that the financial systems needed to be developed and that more
services were needed, rather than single instruments like “microcredit”, in order to
meet the needs of enterprising people who wish to set up micro-enterprises.
Additionally, there is a growing understanding that the self-sustainability of the MFIs
needs to be replaced by that of the self-sustainability of the client.
Policies seemed to be in line with the evolution in awareness and have emerged
with strong impulses from its grass-roots and from civil society. Poverty alleviation
policy formed the basis later followed by policy to promote job creation
entrepreneurship and enterprise development”. Policies are now emerging to
stimulate and regulate the new entrants in the financial systems, the professionalised
NBFIs and microfinance banks and policies, leading to more inclusive sustainable
development. The sustainability of the clients is now receiving more attention and
calls for deepening of the present policies.
Organisations and institutions have grown and been logically modified parallel to
this growth. Many NGOs that first tried out microcredit on a project basis to serve
the poor have grown into NBFIs attending the enterprising self-employed and micro
entrepreneur, with those non-banking financial intermediaries now even transforming
into self-sustainable institutions and specialised banks as part of the stakeholders’
intention to create an all-inclusive financial system. The Non Bank Financial
9 Referred to as “the South”
23
Institutions and Banks start playing a more important role in the sector, start to
compete more openly and are in search of new clients.
Products and services development have followed suit as well. A supply driven
approach with a single product (groups based microcredit) presented to the poor on
a “take it or leave it” basis has been replaced by an understanding that a demand-
driven approach is more effective and that the needs of the socially excluded, self-
employed and micro-entrepreneur are wide. Hence an array of financial products
and services is now on the market. The question remains whether the client base
has been changed over time and whether services offered match the needs of the
clients; and whether we can draw lessons for the development of microfinance in
the Netherlands.
2.1 Microfinance, from beating poverty to sustainable organi-sations and sustainable borrowers?
i. Microcredit for the talented poor...
“Poverty will be eradicated by developing and introducing microfinance. If all poor
people have access to finance and can borrow money, poverty will be eradicated.”
(Microcredit summit; MDG)
We can now see happy faces that tell us that, with only a € 50 loan, Naomi was
able to start her market stall and can now buy more food for her children. The data
are impressive: over 150 million people living in poverty have been reached and
have used the micro-loans extended to them, which have helped them to survive
and generate additional income. Millions of people appreciate this service and there
are thousands joining them every week. They are all fully engaged in their own
small economic activity: the running of market stalls or kiosks, or the stocking of a
vending place with items that can generate some income.
But are microcredit and microfinance reaching the very poor? It is rightly argued that
it is not (Vossen 2007): micro-lending started with offering credit (in a supply driven
mode) to a market accepting loans offered under almost any condition as long as it
24
was competitive with the money lenders. Over the years, the sector became self-
selective, becoming a tool for the less poor.
Data reveal also that most microcredit programmes extended their small loans to
already existing activities, for example to people who have already started a venture
and acquired some resources. Microcredit is most useful for people endowed with
the talents to initiate an economic activity, who are willing to take such risks and are
in a position to accept the related financial obligations. Microcredit is used to a
limited extent by people who have just started something; it is aiming at and
selecting those who have initiated something already, those who have already
acquired some resources and assets. And microfinance is becoming even more
selective. At the higher end we even see that microfinance is now geared towards
the needs of the enterprising and entrepreneurial people, who have already made
a good start, have developed their venture and have acquired relatively considerable
resources.
We have become aware that we are losing sight of the poorest of the poor. In some
cases this leads to new NGOs entering the market with a particular focus on the
very poor. Sometimes they do so with the traditional approaches. However,
technological developments and innovations (IT based approaches) that offer new
chances to reach larger numbers of (potential) clients at rather lower costs are used
more frequently and there is a growing understanding that many of the people who
are not reached are the ones who would be better off with grants.
ii Microfinance and macro economic development...
the chicken and the egg?...
Practice shows the significant positive effects of microcredit and microfinance; in
many respects the poor are better off. Some governments even included statements
to that effect in their development plans. But will microfinance lead to sustainable
economic growth? Can we state that there is a correlation between macro-economic
growth and the growth of the microfinance industry? To what extent is it justified that
governments and the private sector invest in the microfinance industry?
25
An assessment of the publications on microcredit and microfinance does not give
explicit answers to those questions and to date there are not enough longitudinal
studies that will shed light on the issue either.
It appears that the growth of the MFI sector has followed the growth of the economy;
a (tentative) conclusion in line with practice-based knowledge about the developments
in small and medium enterprise sector. But as in so many instances more in-depth
analyses reveal that such statements about microfinance are hard to support with
scientific data. An analysis of the Centrum voor Microfinanciering INHolland (Centre
for Microfinance INHolland) regarding the developments taking place in a selected
number of countries shows that the MFI sector has grown parallel to that of the
national economy (INHolland 2008). Until now there is no evidence that one has an
influence over the other - besides indirect effects.
In Bangladesh, 274 MFIs have provided loans to over 24 million borrowers. On a
population of 120 million (25 million households) this means that the MFI sector is
significant in this country. In spite of this, it is not possible to find and to prove a
direct relation with the national economy in traditional terms. In his biography,
Mohamed Yunus takes a defense stand by stating that economists only look at per
capita income and consumption levels, and that one needs to look at social aspects
as well. Others (Hulme and Moore 2006) conclude that the poor have improved
their economic position significantly but insufficiently, as it will still not lift the
household above the poverty line.
Bolivia has also developed a substantial microfinance industry. The number of
loans has tripled in the last ten years to slightly less than 600,000 on a population
of 8.8 million (2 million households). Gross Domestic Product (GDP) has grown
since 1999 with an average of 4% per annum. Social participation has increased,
but again we have not found evidence that one has triggered the other.
Our general knowledge about the development of the small enterprise sector can
be enlightening. A major lesson drawn from the comprehensive and global
evaluations of small enterprise development and support programmes in the late
eighties was that “the growth of the small enterprise sector is determined by the
26
macro-economic development”. In other words: if you intend to develop the small
and medium (SME) sector, you need to pay attention to and promote the growth of
the economy at large. In laymen’s words: small enterprises do not bring
development, they follow development” (Gosses, Molenaar et al. 1989). Policy to
stimulate the SME sector needs to focus on the creation of an enabling environment
with a level playing field. They should focus on the growth of the economy and only
then on the establishment of (private and public private) SME-support organisations
that will render services on a demand-driven basis. The public sector needs to play
a facilitating role in removing the bottlenecks and/or stumbling blocks and keep a
proper distance from the actual implementation of support programmes. The same
is (probably) true for micro-enterprises and the self-employed and so far there is no
empirical and scientific evidence to prove the opposite.
For microfinance - just an instrument - to be effective, economic and political
conditions must be favourable for overall growth of the economy. This will create
the market conditions for enterprising people to sell products and services, however
tiny their business may be.
iii Microfinance for the creation of jobs and enterprises...
Public statements are often made that microfinance leads to more enterprise
development and boosts entrepreneurship. However, there is no evidence that such
a relationship exists. We do see, however, a growing understanding and acceptance
amongst management of NGOs, donor communities and policymakers of the
changing needs of the micro-borrowers over time. With the growth of the economy,
a number of micro-borrowers have become more mature and enterprising, wishing
their business to grow. From just accepting what is offered to them, they have
started to explicitly demand more services: larger loan amounts at reasonable and
affordable costs and long(er) repayment periods. They are pushing NBFIs towards
lending to the micro-enterprise sector. If the NBFIs want to retain their clients they
need to react to that trend, adjust their structures and services, and their staff will
need to understand them10.
10 See: Ecofuturo FFP in Bolivia that of the function of credit officers into that of salesmen of financial services
27
Over time, the number of MFIs engaged in individual lending programmes for the
larger self-employed and micro-entrepreneurs has gone up, with 81% of all lending
being in the form of individual loans (Microfinance Information eXchange 2007).
Data collected by the Centrum voor Microfinance INHolland in 2008 shows that in
countries where microfinance matures the average loan sizes go up even with the
fast growing number of clients attended by the growing number of MFIs.
See table 2
But the shift towards attending the micro enterprises puts NBFIs in unexpected
dilemma’s. MFIs sustainability depends on the relatively high margins on the small
loans traditionally offered. The supported micro-entrepreneurs cannot afford to pay
the (interest) rates usually charged, and short lending periods are also not in their
interest. If the MFIs do not offer those products at affordable costs, clients will look
for other service providers. The often acclaimed client loyalty is probably a myth in
which the NGOs/NBFIs and some donors still believe; it hardly exists, as people will
opt for products at lower costs (lower interest rates) if these are on offer (Molenaar
and Hofstede 1998). And such can be offered by local (and international) banks
entering the markets. In spite of the definite needs of the micro entrepreneurs of
financial services it remains to be investigated whether the NBFIs with roots in
micro-lending are the appropriate organisations for this segment in the market.
iv Sustainability for whom?
Exigimos créditos ágiles y oportunos
1992, San Salvador, graffiti on a wall next to a bank
Las ONGs de crédito son ladrones.
2002, La Paz, graffiti on the wall of a building in front my hotel
28
Tab
le 2
: N
umbe
r of
MF
Is,
borr
ower
s an
d av
erag
e lo
an s
izes
,
Cou
ntry
Num
ber
of
MF
Is
repo
rtin
g an
d
asse
ssed
Num
ber
of c
lient
s
repo
rted
by
MF
Is
Ave
rage
num
ber
of c
lient
s
Gro
wth
rate
in
port
folio
Ave
rage
loan
size
US
$
Gro
wth
in
aver
age
loan
siz
e
20
0320
0720
0320
0720
0320
07
2003
2007
Bol
ivia
1022
247,
612
676,
554
24,7
6130
,752
24.2
0%1.
397
1.50
07.
37%
Ken
ya9
1120
9,14
684
9,81
623
,238
77,2
5623
2.45
%28
240
041
.84%
Pak
ista
n5
616
2,96
272
8,46
632
,592
121,
411
272.
51%
170
190
11.7
6%
Uga
nda
78
188,
948
207,
200
26,9
9325
,900
-4.0
5%19
550
215
7.44
%
Sou
rce:
Cen
trum
voo
r M
icro
finan
cier
ing
INH
olla
nd,
base
d on
dat
a of
(M
icro
finan
ce I
nfor
mat
ion
eXch
ange
29
People went to the moneylender but cried out that they needed help. The NGOs
came to their rescue, but they are criticised nowadays. Ten years have passed, but
has the situation changed for the poor for whom microcredit was intended? Was it
all to build up self-sustainable organisations or are we concerned with the
sustainability and continuity of the business venture set up by the clients?
Over time, many donor organisations have shifted their attention from extending
loans to the poor to the creation of this new sector. Many believe that the
development of this instrument and its organisation have received and still receive
more attention than the development of the client. Creating an all-inclusive system
has been advocated by the United Nations Development Programme11 (UNDP
2006), accompanied by a growing pressure by the donor community to account for
the funds made available and to report on effects and impacts.
The whole sector is expected to serve all target groups: the very poor and less poor
who merely want to survive or add some income, the (temporary) self- employed,
the micro-entrepreneurs and the small entrepreneurs. Furthermore, all institutions
are expected to be self-sustainable, with the clients paying for the actual services.
The question may be put whether such a pattern is sustainable in itself. To what
extent are we correctly charging the clients?
The Microfinance Information eXchange reported that of the 3,000 NGOs/NBFIs
surveyed (Microfinance Information eXchange 2007) there were (only or already?)
300 organisations that claimed that they had reached sustainability. They had
achieved this through proper financial management, charging interest rates that
cover costs; interest rates that the clients willingly paid.
A closer look into general practices is very illustrative of a reality many do not want
to see. The sustainability of the micro-lending organisations is determined by the
income they generate, i.e. the margins they make on lending operations. The
operations are costly; therefore high interest rates are needed and justified.
11 The so called Bleu Book is a now a major reference document for anybody engaged in microfinance development programmes
30
Studying the issue of sustainability one remains with the impression that all
reporting is about sustainability of the actors in the sector. What about the
sustainability of the borrowers? Do they have a chance to opt out? How many of
them will indeed become sustainably self-employed? You have no income, no job,
and no choice but to start for yourself. The poor self-employed emerge. You hardly
have any savings and finance your economic (survival) activity almost for 90% with
borrowed money. The interest rates you pay are as high as 45% per annum. Do you
have to be a macro-economist to know that, in the long run, this is not
sustainable?
Anyone bitten by the moneylender will know it is disastrous and often fatal.
However, being bitten by an NGO can be painful as well. Are people better off?
Have we offered them a chance to set up economic activities that are really self-
sustainable? Will those new economic activities generate sustainable work and
therefore income? Which economic activities in society generate sufficiently high
returns for the borrower to be able to pay such rates indeed? And also, will it
eventually lead to economic growth? Those questions were pushed to the
background when most attention went to the building up of an all inclusive - self
sustainable - financial system. Nowadays clients have matured, become conscious
of their own situation and are more aware of their needs. They become more
outspoken and make it understood that their sustainability is more relevant than that
of the institutions proper. The question arises for stakeholders whether a neo-liberal
stand will hold ground. Maybe time has come to reassess the issue of sustainability
and search for new solutions whereby stakeholders take a broader view.
If for macro-economic reasons we consider it important that people participate -
economically - in society and can only achieve this through microcredits, we may
as well ask who needs to pay for all costs. For a dynamic economy we need not
only social participation but (economical) sustainable micro and small enterprises
as well. Both sectors in the markets require their approaches. Sustainability also
implies level playing field and equal chances for the enterprises started. It obliges
us to look into sustainability and fairness again with a more social-economic view.
In my opinion, the era to pay attention to this has come.
31
2.2 Policies in support of the clients or the organisations?Policies in developing countries to support the sector have been modified in line
with a broader awareness of the many problems to tackle: poverty, weak financing
of the intermediaries, lack of jobs and entrepreneurship. The actors, the NGOs and
NBFIs have played a very determining and active role in shaping those policies.
Over time, many micro-finance organisations have adjusted their policies and have
gradually shifted away from a direct focus on the user towards a basic concern with
the development of their own organisation and its sustainability. The challenge in
the years to come is to develop policies that take into account the sustainability of
the clients as well. See figure 2.
Figure 2 Evolution of policies for microfinance
1900 - present• Povertyorientationandsocial
participation through economic activities (income generating)
• Developmentoffinancialintermediariesand their sustainability
• Developmentofall-inclusivemicrofinance system
• Sustainabilityofenterpeneurialclients• Fairnessforthepoor
Since late 90ies
2006 - present
The future?
The client
The institutions
The clientagain (?)
By the early nineties, development specialists and fieldworkers had become well
aware of the limitations of development strategies and the disastrous effects of
poverty on the poor and on society as a whole. New approaches were sought that
could be instrumental to stimulate the poor to actively participate in society. Grants
did not lead to desired independent behaviour, but microcredit was expected to
have such effects. It was introduced and developed at several places in the world
at almost the same time. It turned out to be the right instrument at the right time.
And microcredit was received favourably by poor people.
NGOs understood quickly that extending microcredit could also generate income,
allowing them to reduce dependency on external donors. The target group appeared
to be willing to pay relatively high interest rates, as long as they were significantly
lower than those of the moneylenders. The NGOs themselves were instrumental in
32
formulating policy to that respect. Donors have jumped happily onto the bandwagon,
as this gave them an argument to, in time, withdraw assistance from NGOs that
they had supported for years. The income generated should be sufficient to ensure
self-sustainability of the NGOs and the poor could generate such an income.
In many countries, the financial systems were deficient in such a way that indeed
attention was paid to developing the microfinance sector: as a matter of fact most
of the attention by the donor community was dedicated to this issue. The primary
objective has become organisational development and not so much the development
of the micro-enterprises or other economic activities. Attention first focuses on the
creation of new intermediaries who in turn will focus primarily on their own
sustainability and development patterns. The generated income, the performance
of their organisation, the quality of management and staff and the risks incurred are
all of prime concern.
Transformation processes and organisational development programmes nowadays
get full support. Many of those programmes are based on the belief that there will
be a gradual growth of NGOs evolving into NBFIs and eventually into (Non) Banking
Financial Institutions and even regulated - specialised - banks. This goes hand in
hand with a belief that clients will graduate too, contrary to findings that such
graduations are of limited significance. Once established and functioning properly,
these organisations can shift attention to the prime concern of their borrowers: their
own sustainability.
In growing economies, the roles of micro- and small enterprises and of people
wishing to set up such businesses become more relevant and important. There is a
new group of people that wish to set up new enterprises with an eye to continuity,
generating decent work and a more steady income. In order to do so, these new
entrants in the economy need larger amounts of money, more tailored to the need
of the new enterprises and entrepreneurs. To support this, there is a need for
policies to promote and stimulate micro- and small enterprises. These policies focus
on creating an enabling environment, a level playing field for the sector and
effectively functioning support institutions. New financial services are needed
besides pure lending such as guarantees, transfer facilities, factoring and leasing,
33
but often still in amounts smaller than financial institutions - if at all present - are
used to offer. This calls for the development of new financial intermediaries.
We see an increase in the average loan amounts and a prevalence of individual
lending; by 2007 81% of the MFIs were working with individual loan programmes
(see table 3). They have started to extend services to micro- and eventually small
enterprises. Mature NBFIs in countries like Kenya, Bolivia or Pakistan, continue to
offer small microcredits, but they have added smaller loans to their package as well,
shifting their attention to micro-enterprises. Mohamed Yunus, for instance, confirms
that in Grameen Bank average loans have gone up to the extent that now installment
payments are higher than the average loan size in the start-up phase of the bank.
This process is very much determined by a shift from supply-driven operations to a
more market- and demand-oriented approach. While in the past the MFIs could just
offer one single type of product that was widely received and procured by the users
- since these had no alternatives -, the MFIs see themselves confronted with a more
mature client group and, more interestingly, with a more competitive microfinance
market.
Table 3 Average loan size and proportion of organisations in developing countries
engaged in the product for the various types of loans available.
Average
loan size
($)
Proportion of number of MF
organisations engaged in
the product (%)
Individual loans 1,142 36
Solidarity group guaranteed/
individual lending
350 45
Solidarity group-based lending 122 9
Village banking 145 10
Source Centrum voor Microfinanciering INHolland/Triodos Facet based on data of
Microfinance Information eXchange)
34
The question here is therefore why do NGO/NBFIs wish to move upwards? If they
do so, it must be because of the new markets they expect to serve. It looks like it is
based on the belief that once the poor have become economically active, they will
eventually graduate and become entrepreneurial. NGOs and NBFIs will then have
to graduate accordingly. But the fact that many will not graduate is thus denied.
Many poor will seek wage employment once they are offered that chance. They
might be enterprising out of necessity but that does not imply that they will become
entrepreneurial12. Secondly the question may be raised whether this traditional view
on the market MFIs operate in, still holds ground. Also in developing countries the
labour and enterprise market are subject to changes with lifelong employment or
entrepreneurship becoming less prevailing. Also the temporary self-employed will
look for financial services. The MFIs need to have programmes and policies to meet
the needs of the self-employed and the temporary entrepreneurs as well.
2.3 NGOs becoming NBFIs or even banks in search for new client groups
Over time, NGOs with donor support started to expand microcredit funds and
became aware that the real issue was access to financial services and building-up
sustainable financial intermediaries13. Therefore, they offered more services to their
clientele (ranging from savings, transfers to insurances and even leasing) and
became microfinance institutions, some of which are regulated nowadays. Now,
however, there is doubt whether the poor, who indeed deserve very good services,
are better off with financial intermediaries functioning like that. To what extent will
that be to the expense of the client when they have to pay for all costs? And to what
extent is it justified to let them wait (and how long can and must they wait) while the
NGOs are still transforming themselves into self-sustainable (non) banking financial
intermediaries (fig. 3)? The fast growth of internet based lending systems (like
KIVA, Prosper, Empresar or MYC414) already indicates that the traditional
practitioners leave a gap for others and that the market is far from satisfied yet.
12 Prudence must be observed with the expression “necessity entrepreneurship” for the many people who struggle to survive through income generating activities. It is doubtful whether this is done with a vision to set up an enterprise
13 The development and growth of Credit Unions take place separately and are not discussed here.
14 Different internet based systems that have in common that they seek a way to link clients directly to potential investors
35
Figure 3 From NGOs towards microfinance banks
NGOs
NBFIs
MF Banks
General Banks
The aggregated data reveal that the NGOs are gradually becoming less dominant
in the market, with banks and non-bank financial institutions (Rhyne and Otero
2006) taking over a larger share of the market. Three groups of banks are becoming
major players: (i) those graduated from NGOs/NBFIs (such as K-Rep in Kenya or
Mibanco in Peru), (ii) local general banks and (iii) international banks (Boúúart
2008). In spite of their claims that they serve the poor, most of these banks serve
the upper end of the market: their major clients are the micro-entrepreneurs. Their
entry into the market leaves less room for those NBFIs that are gradually moving
upward in lending operations. This obliges NBFIs in search of new markets to
distinguish themselves: the individual customer who wants to become self-employed
and has not yet dared to start a micro- or small enterprise might be that particular
client. In addition they might pay more attention to the question to what extent they
are still operating in line with their original social mission15.
When MFIs move upwards with their operations, they leave the poorer clients
unattended and create a gap in the market. Of late, we have seen this gap being
filled in two ways: Firstly, new NGOs are entering the market but now with a very
15 Social performance measuring programmes might be a way out here.
36
clear focus on poverty alleviation, seeking to introduce new methods and very well
aware that they do not wish to follow the development path that the previous NGO/
NBFIs have travelled. They will seek for innovative approaches in organising
service delivery to the poor referred to as social innovators (Rhyne and Otero
2006). Secondly, organisations specialised in IT based innovations will enter this
market launching new cost effective and easily accessible products, such as
lending through mobile telephone and internet-based lending and savings operations
(technology innovators).
2.4 From social services to servicing enterprises…
i From credit for all poor to loans for (selected) entrepreneurs...
Economic survival activities have less to do with enterprise development than
generally thought. Poor people are indeed ingenious in finding ways to survive, as
Gert van Manen rightly argues in “Microcredit, Sound Business or Development
Instrument” (van Manen 2004). It is impressive to see how, every day, poor
women and men alike find ways to generate just that little bit of income that brings
them to the next day or even allows parents to send their children to school. This
gives all family members hope that their children will eventually have a better life.
An enterprising attitude might be needed to survive, but that does not imply that we
are dealing with the start-up and development of a business. It also does not imply
that all those who struggle daily to survive have the entrepreneurial acumen and
attitude that will result in successful enterprises. How many of the poor that now run
a market stall will become owner of a super or minimarket? How many rickshaw
drivers will become owners of a transport company? How many of them will
consider dropping their activity when offered a formal job? How many of them really
look beyond the immediate future and think of building up their businesses? Most
of these people will prefer to pay off the small micro-loan and take that job.
We must be careful in labelling a microcredit programme as business development.
Most of the smaller loans are used to finance permanent working capital for trade
and for some service activity. With very short repayment periods, often in terms of
weeks or months, aggravated by the high interest rates, borrowers hardly have a
37
chance to build up capital and will need to renew their loans constantly. A
percentage started as micro entrepreneur or has become one; they prefer to stay in
their business and let it grow. Sometimes, some of them graduate into becoming
larger scale enterprises.16 These are presented as the role models for others to
follow.
The more successful NBFIs develop new financial instruments, catering for the
needs of those micro and small entrepreneurs. However, by doing so, they will need
to adjust their systems. Loan decisions could first be based in the repayment
capacity of the household. When MFIs will wish to sell their loans to the new
enterprises, they will need to evaluate the financial economic return of the proposed
businesses and the entrepreneurial capacity of the applicants. From an “open to all”
programme, they become more selective. This implies adjustments in the
organisational culture, new procedures and recruitment of other type of staff
members. And, above all, new loan conditions.
ii From group-based approaches to individualised services
Many NGOs started their microcredit programmes with group-based methodologies.
Originally it was assumed that such methodologies were effective and efficient in
attending the target groups. Larger numbers of poor people could be attended to
and transaction costs were kept to a minimum.
Only 20% of organisations engaged in microcredit and microfinance are solely
concentrating on group-based programmes (table 4).
Of course, some NGOs are convinced that group-based mechanisms are the
proper instrument for development. They can be quite effective in introducing social
mobilization processes and programmes to create more awareness. To reach out
to large numbers, group-based approaches can be most effective. Other services
- dealing with literacy, education, awareness raising, health, sanitation - can be
16 Studies carried out in the eighties have already showed that relatively few people will graduate from survival or micro to small business study of.Little, I. M. D., D. Mazumdar, et al. (1987). Small manufacturing enterprises : a comparative study of India and other economies. New York; Oxford University Press [for] the World Bank,.; Although the contrary is often mentioned that has not yet been proven…
38
channelled effectively through such groups, but these groups do not function as a
guarantee system. Others start with groups mainly for distribution reasons, whereby
the members of the group are a mere referral instrument to find the right clients.
Groups can be very effective as referral system, distribution channels and social
control mechanisms, but such control systems can become social pressure cookers
as well. Practice shows that groups disintegrate once one or more members
become successful, graduate to entrepreneurial levels and need more personalised
financial services17
This issue so far has been studied on a very limited scale18 but apparently too much
criticizing is taboo. Nevertheless we may state that group work can be effective in
social participation programmes, but practice reveals that when it comes to
enterprise, development group lending is less adequate.
17 In 1998 I argued such already in Molenaar, N. (1998). The Myths of Microcredit. Time for reflection.
18 Fundamental research is for instance undertaken by Dean Karlan and his team at Yale University, and Innovations for Poverty Action, as presented at the seminar on Entrepreneurship and Microfinance organised in October, 2008, Amsterdam, University of Amsterdam
39
The shift to more individual-based lending programmes goes hand in hand with an
increase in the average loan amount and a shift in the use of micro-loans. It reflects
a shift from survival economic activities to a focus on enterprise development. See
table 4.
Table 4 Shifts in microfinance methodology and channels
2006 2003
Sample size MFI’s 704 231
Methodology;
individual lending
based mainly
Individual lending systems22 (%) 35.8 32.0
Individual lending mixed with Solidarity
programmes
44.9 41.6
Methodology :
Group based only
Solidarity - group guarantee based
programmes
9.2 15.2
Village Banking - group based lending 10.1 11.3
Organisation/
channel Type (%)
Bank 8.0 13.4
Credit Union 10.5 8.7
Non Bank Financial Institution (NBFI) 32.7 31.2
NGO 40.1 41.1
Rural Bank 8.8 5.2
Average Loan
Balance per
Borrower/ GNI per
Capita (%)
82.5 74.7
Source Data of Mix market MFI benchmarks 2007 adjusted by Centrum voor
Microfinanciering INHolland
19 Example: 9.2% of the MFI’s from this sample were using solidarity methodology in 2006
40
iii From finance to revival of BDS services?
Offering only financial services to (micro-) entrepreneurs is expected to suffice and
enable them to start and develop their businesses. The minimalistic approach and
theory has strongly steered us toward that line of thinking and may even have done
harm. Coaching and training are not considered as effective as lending, and the
RSIE studies in the late eighties revealed the importance of macro-economic
conditions for the growth and development of the SME sector. Without a conducive
and enabling environment, and without a level playing field for all participants, it will
be difficult for SMEs to develop and grow. The evaluative studies also argued that
supply driven services are less effective, but that did not imply that they need not
be developed and offered.
Figure 4. L’histoire se repête?
From integral services for SMEs to BDS added to...
Financial andbusiness
development servicesfor small and micro
enterprises
Mono product i.e.micro credit for the
poor
All inclusive financialservices for microborrowers / users
Financial services formicro entrepreneurs
41
MFIs took off on mono-service paths and many of them even closed the BDS
service delivery units altogether. If they offered training or counselling, it was mainly
focused on explaining borrowers how to make use of the micro-loans, what
procedures to follow and which conditions to meet (fig.4).
The minimalistic approach pushed many BDS suppliers out of the market. However,
with NBFIs moving towards financial services for micro- and small enterprises, so
does the attention move towards additional services to meet the needs of the micro
and small entrepreneurs.20 General feeling is that those are more relevant and
effective for small enterprises, but it is still not quite clear whether the very small
borrower will need such BDS services (Sievers 2004). An important lesson to draw
when promoting this in Europe.
20 For instance in Bolivia NGOs such as IDEPRO that once fully committed themselves to microcredit and even set up special financial institutions (Ecofuturo FFP) are not setting up new BDS programmes again.
42
3 How green are the pastures in Europe?
We are very rich in Europe. Our wealth allows us to introduce and develop systems
and programmes. There are a number of successful organisations that have grown
significantly, but it is not yet clear in which direction things will evolve. There is a
rather top-down approach, with the EU now taking a prominent place, launching the
“European Initiative for the development of microcredit in support of growth and
development”, but stakeholders are stuck between a focus on combating poverty,
social exclusion at the one hand and enterprise development at the other. The
Lisbon Agenda plays a dominant role in that debate.
The people successfully running MFIs have learned from practice, from each other
and from the many evaluations carried out. However, there is not one single overall
approach There are a variety of programmes and methodologies, most of which are
engaged in enterprise development (regardless of the client groups they target).
The biannual survey on microfinance in Europe undertaken by Foro Nantik Lum at
the request of the European Microfinance Network EMN demonstrate this
clearly(Jayo, Rico et al. 2008)
Most noteworthy is that average loan sizes are rather high compared to those in
developing countries. Still, there are a large number of enterprising people in
Europe who consider themselves excluded from the existing financial system. A rich
society which has become very diverse with dramatic changes in the labour market
is in need of innovative approaches to strike a balance between two overriding
objectives: making Europe more enterprising and reducing social exclusion. Thus,
linkages between policy and practitioners trying to develop MFIs need to be
established and due attention needs to be paid to further boosting organisational
development, with the aim to serve the market.
3.1 Enterprise development or social inclusion?... The mission of EMN is to promote microfinance as a tool to fight social and
economic exclusion by developing self-employment and micro-entrepreneurship.
This will be achieved by supporting the development of microfinance organisations
43
through the dissemination of good practices and by improving the regulatory
framework at European Union and country level …..
(Mission statement of the European Microfinance Network - EMN)
Microfinance is still a new phenomenon in Europe and gradually receives more
attention and support. It is embraced as an effective instrument either through
stimulating social inclusion by economic participation or through the promotion of
entrepreneurship and development of businesses. A wide range of initiatives are
deployed, resulting in emerging NGOs setting up programmes for the unemployed,
state-owned development banks developing business starting up programmes or
private financial institutions embarking on small enterprise lending. In most cases
the initiators claim to be engaged in microfinance. There is no consensus yet as to
the role of microfinance in Europe, yet the European Commission and some
governments centrally state that it needs to be supported. In the past five years
microcredit and microfinance have evolved dramatically. This goes hand in hand
with a progressive understanding of possibilities and limitations of these instruments
in Europe. Scattered over Europe, initiatives have been taken without much
uniformity: community based microcredit programmes versus donor supported
programmes. Interestingly, a number of them have flourished, often attributed to the
charismatic leadership of the founders.
In 2005, it was still difficult to report significant results in terms of numbers of people
served and hardly any common objectives among the initiatives could be revealed;
in 2007, data have demonstrated that the sector has gained ground. (Jayo, Rico et
al. 2008)
The number of loans disbursed between 2006 and 2007 has increased with 14%,
while the growth rate of the value micro-loans disbursed in Europe between 2006
and 2007 was approximately 32%.21 The loan sizes vary with the institutional type
in Europe. Banks, non-bank financial institutions and government bodies tend to
offer bigger loans than credit unions, NGOs, savings banks or foundations
(Table 5).
21 The highest growth rate can be seen in Spain (154%), followed by Netherlands (63%), Austria (59%) and Belgium (54%), where the sector is very young but growing fast.
44
Table 5 Average loan sizes and microfinance organisations in Europe
Type of intermediaries Approximate average /
range of (individual)
loan sizes (€)
Microfinance
organisations engaged
(in %)
Credit Unions 4,500 2
NGOs/Foundations 8,200 54
Savings Banks 9,700 6
Public/private bodies -
project status
11,000 - 13,000 23
Banks/non-bank
financial institutions
14,500 - 15,500 14
The aggregated data demonstrate that there is an apparent tendency for the
attention to shift to larger loan amounts and therefore to small enterprise
development. This implies a change in the type of clients targeted. A closer look at
the distribution of this growth within the EU shows us that this upward trend is
spread evenly across all member states. In 2005, the average loan size increased
from € 7,700 to above € 11,000, with loans ranging from € 545 - sometimes group-
based - in Eastern / Central Europe mainly to over € 30.000 in Western Europe.
There are two distinct developments in Western and Eastern/Central Europe.
In Western Europe microfinance is considered - by policy makers - a valuable
instrument, following the Lisbon agenda, designed to promote growth, employment
and social inclusion. Social security systems undergo drastic changes, stimulating
people to become socially and economically active. This goes hand in hand with
changes in the labour market, stressing the importance of self-employment and
placing more emphasis on the education systems on entrepreneurship. Those
changes “produce enterprising people” in search for new financial instruments for
business start-up and self-employment.
In spite of the presently developed financial markets and institutions in Western
Europe, people wishing to become self-employed and/or setting up an SME have
45
difficulties in obtaining external financing for economic activities (due to costs, risk
perceptions, and evaluation methodologies) and the absence of relevant additional
financial services (pensions, insurances).
Initiatives have a more local and personalised character, with local organisations
experimenting with microcredit programmes (Underwood 2006) and, in spite of all
policy support received so far, the microfinance sector in (Western) Europe has
difficulty demonstrating that MFIs can operate in an effective and self-sustaining
way in an environment characterised by highly developed financial sectors and
welfare systems (Everts and Lahn 2006).
In Central and Eastern Europe, the micro-lending providers’ main focus is on
reaching larger numbers of people without access to external financing, either due
to the absence of financial intermediaries or due to the collapse of the overall
financial system.
We see a “traditional development pattern”, with NGOs and MFIs being set up - with
external donor support - to provide services to people not reached by formal
financial institutions. Their main aim is to reach large numbers of socially and/or
economically excluded people.
According to the European Commission’s estimates, there are about 700,000 (new)
potential microfinance clients in Europe, representing a loan portfolio of € 6 billion.
This seems to warrant special support. The debate about the role and purpose of
microcredit and microfinance takes place most at central levels. Contrary to the
situation in developing countries, the NGOs play a limited role in this debate.
Representatives of the EMN are consulted on an ad hoc basis. Banks appear to
play a more important role; their representative bodies, such as Eurofi22, are
listened to by the European Commission and consulted more structurally in the
policy formulation process.
Recently the European Commission has acknowledged the potential of microfinance
with the launching of the “European Initiative for the development of microcredit in
22 Eurofi, a European think tank of EU leading Financial, Insurance and Banking Institutions (based in the main EU countries) created in 2000.
46
support of growth and development “(European_Commission 2007).Not only does
the name of the initiative proper hint at the difficulty of reaching a consensus in
which direction to work, but it also hints at the development of commercially self-
sustainable microfinance institutions. The MFIs are expected to offer microcredit to
beat social exclusion and a financial system needs to emerge with a diverse set of
financial intermediaries offering a wide range of financial services to large numbers
of enterprising people who wish to set up their own business. Even the EMN seems
to struggle with this dilemma, as can be learned from its mission statement at the
beginning of this section.
3.2 Mismatch between mission(s) and practiceOver the past years, microfinance has been introduced and has rather quietly
gained a place in a number of European countries, such as Finland, France, Spain,
the United Kingdom and Rumania. Many of these programmes have been launched
by people inspired by microcredit in developing countries and are often lead by
professionals with previous experience in such programmes. In most cases the
launching of the programmes was not the result of explicitly formulated policy, policy
often followed practice. Exchanging experiences and ideas from the South
constitutes the start of the policy formulating process among the practitioners. The
European Microfinance Network (EMN) plays a catalyst role in this process. At
present, it has 67 members from 21 EU member states(EMN 2008), with a joint
portfolio size of over 80.000 clients
For the European Initiative to be effective, coherence between the European and
national poliies needs to be sought. In the 2007 Survey of the Microfinance sector
in Europe (Jayo, Rico et al. 2008) an assessment was also made of the Mission
Statements of the majority of the organisations. These could be classified into the
following four main categories:
- Job creation and entrepreneurship promotion
- Small and Medium Enterprise (SME) and economic development
- Financial inclusion
- Social inclusion and the fight against poverty
Creating jobs and promoting employment as well as social inclusion and fighting
poverty are considered the primary goals (29%). Twenty-six percent focus on SME
47
and economic development and 20% on financial inclusion. Overall, the greatest
emphasis in Western EU countries is on job creation and financial and social
inclusion, and in the Eastern EU states on SME and economic development. See
figure 5.
Figure 5 Microfinance diverse mission statements in Europe
Social inclusion andfighting against
poverty.26% Job creation and
entrepreneurshippromotion.
29%
Financial inclusion.20% Small and Medium
Enterprise (SME) andeconomy development.
26%
Source; EMN survey 2006-2007
The EMN survey reveals that most of the foundations and NGOs claim that they
concentrate on employment and on a combination of social and financial inclusion,
whereas banking institutions (banks and savings banks) concentrate on financial
inclusion and SME development. Governmental bodies focus on employment and
SME development and non-bank financial institutions focus on SME development.
Apparently there is a mismatch between reality and mission statements, and overall
loan sizes are increasing. In Western Europe, most microfinance organisations tend
to focus on business start-up and business development; this is the type of
economic activity the banks and existing financial intermediaries prefer to support
and for which they have services in place. This trend may still leave the self-
employed person without being served. Additionally, it will not reach the many
socially excluded who seek ways to supplement limited household income with
small economic activities (for example for those depending on social welfare and
those who just want to do something in addition to formal - part time - work).
48
In Eastern/Central Europe, the microfinance institutions seek their own self-
sustainability. As this can be achieved by attending large numbers of clients with
“traditional” microcredit, loan sizes tend to increase. Larger loan amounts offered to
existing clients give clients the opportunity to improve income and to reduce costs
relatively. This might be sustained as long as the clients are willing to pay relatively
high interest rates, but it still lures the intermediary away from its original mission.
3.3 A large number of organisations, but only a few are actively engaged
In the European Union there is a wide spectrum of organisations (most of them
not-for-profit entities) offering microcredit and/or microfinance: non-governmental
organisations, foundations, government bodies, savings banks, banks, credit
unions and non-bank financial institutions. This variety is related to the regulatory
framework in each country.
The vast majority of the European Union lenders are not-for-profit organisations in
the form of Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs), foundations (; 54% of
microfinance organisations) or government bodies/projects (23%). In Central/
Eastern European countries (e.g. Rumania or Hungary), microcredit providers tend
to have a for-profit legal status. In Europe, banks have not yet made serious
attempts to move into the microfinance market. So far they have incidentally
assisted NGOs, but no special programmes have as yet been set up by them
independently. Should they do so, they would most probably seek to serve the small
and micro-entrepreneurs. Additionally, they might opt to form a coalition with NGOs
to reach the lower end of the market. This remains an area where policy and options
still need to be worked out. Credit unions, state banks, ethical banks, savings banks
and non-bank financial institutions also disburse micro-loans within the EU, but they
form a smaller part of the spectrum.
In Poland, Portugal and the UK, hundred percent of the organisations are NGOs. In
Italy, NGOs and foundations make up two-thirds of the market. In Spain, Germany
and Finland, lending activity is restricted to banking or government agencies. In the
UK, non-governmental lending institutions have a specific legal status: “community
development financial institutions”.
49
This group of organisations engaged in microfinance service delivery can be split
up again into small - specialist - organisations and larger institutions, where the
microcredit programme represents a small portion of their activity.
Most non-bank lenders have a geographic scope limited to regions or localities. The
most striking issue is that most of them (above 50%) tend to disburse less than 50
loans per annum.
In 2007, only 20% of the organisations reported that they were disbursing more than
400 loans per annum. Most of these organisations are located in the Central/
Eastern EU countries (Poland, Bulgaria and Romania). In these countries, MFIs are
also founded with that perspective. In Western Europe (France, Finland, UK and
Spain) there are also some larger organisations operating on a large scale, but
there is as yet no general consensus that the market needs to be served by larger
organisations. Many organisations in Western Europe became engaged through
project funding (European Social Fund, local, central government funding). Their
organisation life cycle seems to be determined by the project funding and no clear
policies have as yet been formulated to support them beyond such a period.
Banks, non-bank financial institutions and government bodies tend to offer bigger
loans (ranging from € 15,450 to € 11,000) mainly for micro and small enterprises
(start-up) than credit unions, NGOs, savings banks or foundations (€ 11,100 to
€ 4,500). In most - Western - EU countries, well established networks of banks and
financial intermediaries exist, covering almost all types of services (contrary to the
situation in many developing countries). To reach out to a large number of clients,
their networks of banks and their administrative and IT systems are very valuable.
Microfinance operators state that they wish to operate with banks. However,
working with banks also pushes microfinance programmes towards financing of
business (start-up) and enterprise development. This also appears to be the case
in pilot schemes such as the ones set up in the Netherlands with the Ministry of
Social Affairs. Whether the present banking system is geared up for rendering
services that lead to active social inclusion remains to be seen, but active policy
formulation and implementation in that direction by the banking community should
not be expected.
50
3.4 So many services, and yet the primary focus is on SMEsAlmost all microfinance institutions in Europe offer credit in the form of small
individual loans (ranging from € 525 to more than € 30,000). Hardly any of them
have opted for group-based lending or lending supported by group guarantees. The
MFIs and other organisations do not offer “traditional” microcredit, e.g. very small
amounts with relatively high interest rates and extremely short repayment periods,
nor are the loans offered intended for survival economic activities. Rather, there is
a tendency to offer smaller loans in support of enterprises and self-employment.
i Clients are mainly the self-employed and the micro-/small entrepreneur
The client groups reached and serviced by microfinance organisations in Europe
tend to be quite different from the traditional target groups of MFIs in developing
countries. Again, it becomes apparent that their main focus is on enterprise
development. The following significant issues emerge:
- Focusing on SMEs
- Relatively large proportion of business start-up (in Western Europe)
- Tendency to increase loan size
- Less presentation of women in the portfolio
- Less dominance of rural/urban differences
MFIs claim that they focus on the unemployed people or people on welfare, ethnic
minorities and immigrants. Some MFIs also claim that special attention is given to
youths and people with special - physical or psychological - needs.
Whatever target group they claim to attend to, MFI’s main focus is on enterprise
development and business creation. The majority of MFIs currently active in Europe
target start-up businesses (86%) as well as existing enterprises (74%). The smaller
enterprises are of major concern, with 61% of the organisations supporting
businesses with five or fewer employees. Most operate in the formal economy, with
approximately one in three (32%) rendering services to unregistered informal sector
businesses. Lenders subsequently tend to assist businesses in making the
transition to the formal sector (see figure 6).
51
Figure 6: Organisations in Europe offering microfinance and their client groups
Start-up enterprises
Existing enterprises
Registered businesses with lessthan 5 employees
Entrepreneurs in the pre-start upphase feasibility studies
Informal sector / unregisteredbusinesses
Registered businesses with 5-9employees
Other
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
86%
74%
61%
36%
32%
30%
17%
Percentage of organisations attending respective client groups
Source: EMN 2007 Survey 2006/2007
In the UK and the Netherlands, micro-lending is primarily an urban phenomenon. In
France, Spain and Italy, the organisations focus both on urban and rural areas. In
Romania and Poland, the main emphasis is on the rural population (although 50%
of the MFIs target both rural and urban clients). This focus is a response to high
rural unemployment after the closure of state farms during the transition from a
centrally planned to a market economy. But again the tendency is to attend the
relatively larger clients.
With 44% of microloans(Jayo, Rico et al. 2008)23 extended to them, women remain
under-represented in lending figures, both in relation to their proportion in the
population and in relation to micro-lending programmes elsewhere in the world.24
23 This lending rate, however, is greater than female entrepreneurship rates in Europe, which are estimated to be 30% see Middlesex, U. B. S. (2000). “Young Entrepreneurs, Women Entrepreneurs, Ethnic Minority Entrepreneurs and Co-Entrepreneurs in the European Union and Central and Eastern Europe.”
24 Combined lending data for Central and Eastern Europe, the Balkans and the Newly Independent States suggests that 62% of micro-loan clients are women. In North America, 59% of clients are women and in developing countries well over 80% of clients are women (Underwood, T. (2006). Overview of the Microcredit Sector in Europe 2004-2005. EMN Working paper. 4.).
52
Again it shows that more attention is being paid to the higher end of the market and
less to the issue of social exclusion often without explicitly opting for this direction.
ii Service packages mainly geared for small and micro enterprises
The service packages that prevail in Europe reflect the (implicit) preference to
support SMEs. The key characteristics are:
- Individual loans rather than group-based lending. Almost all operators in Europe
prefer individual lending programmes to group-based lending.
- The average loan size in Europe is around € 11.000, ranging from € 525 to
more than € 60,000, far above the EU defined of € 25,000, and increasing over
time with the higher loans offered by a number of German, Hungarian and
Italian MFIs and Dutch - governmental programmes25.
- Loan terms are determined by the type of business: the current average loan
term is three years, quite long in comparison with most developing countries.
Grace periods are normally six months. Again, comparing this with practice in
developing countries, it is apparent that the financial burden plays a determining
factor in defining such conditions.
- Interest rates remain a controversial and unsolved issue. The average interest
rate charged in Europe by MFIs is 8%, which is more than three points above
Euribor (4.9%). There is, however, a clear distinction in Europe: in Western
Europe market rates are indeed acceptable but extremely high rates are not
accepted on moral or ethical grounds. In Eastern and Central Europe in
countries such as Romania, Bulgaria, Slovakia and Hungary, more for-profit
organisations can be found, which strive for self-sustainability and charge high
interest rates to cover operating and financial costs.
- In addition to interest, most MFIs - in their desire to cover costs - in the EU area
charge loan application fees, loan processing and interest penalties on top of
the interest as a means for covering operational costs. This is most common
where MFIs strive for their own self-sustainability.
25 The Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment finances a support programme offering training, advise and sub-ordinated loans up to € 31.900 for business start up to social welfare beneficiaries
53
iii Other financial services coming up
Microfinance refers to the provision of a range of financial services that includes
small loans for enterprise development but also to non-financial services or better
referred to as business development/support services.
Almost one third of the MFIs in Europe offer “other financial services” (beside
individualised lending for self-employed and SMEs), such as consumer loans,
savings products, insurance, money transfer services, pensions, home mortgages
and debt counselling services geared towards vulnerable people with no access to
formal banking.
Unsecured lending is not very common in the Europe. Most MFIs seek ways to
secure loans through collateral or through external guarantees (third party
guarantees or guarantees from guarantee funds). In quite some EU countries,
general and specialised guarantee funds are in place in support of lending to SMEs.
MFIs tend to seek cooperation with such guarantee funds, especially when they
themselves move more towards supporting SMEs. Interesting enough, in Central/
Eastern EU countries such as Hungary, Bulgaria and Rumania, where achieving
operational sustainability is a main goal, most organisations make secured loans.
iv Business support services widely accepted
There is a clear segregation in Europe between financial services and business
support services. When training, counselling, mentoring or business advisory
services are needed, most of the MFIs cooperate with specialised SME support
organisations and refer clients to such organisations. Most of the services developed
are geared towards support for small business start-up and enterprise development.
Often they focus on special target groups and fail to become mainstream (Triodos_
Facet and IMES 2008).
In some instances there are special programmes for the socially excluded to
motivate them or to remove psychological barriers that prohibit their participation in
society. There are, however, no special business support programmes that are
54
geared towards people who wish to embark on small economic activities26. In both
cases the real challenge is to develop cost effective systems that have the potential
to reach out to large numbers and that are fit for the enterprising self-employed and
for individuals who wish to embark upon small economic activities.
26 Only recently some initiatives to develop Financial Literacy programmes have been launched in Europe
55
4 Is there a future for microfinance in the Netherlands?
The lucky ones may be living in the Netherlands. We are late in discovering the
possibilities of microfinance and this can be to our advantage. We have the
possibility to study the evolution of microcredit and microfinance in the South and in
Europe. Over the past decade, attention has primarily been focused on providing
services for (small) business start-up, but nobody has taken any real microcredit of
microfinance initiatives. Insight and experience have mainly been gained through
projects with external funding. The activities initiated by the projects have not lead
to large scale programmes (numbers of loans extended are extremely low), neither
have privately-owned NBFIs emerged. At the same time, the number of self
-employed (actual and potential) people has increased significantly and even more
impressive are the numbers of men and women contemplating to start “something”.
No clear choices have been made as to which target groups to aim at, which
services to offer and through which channels. Subsequently processes of product
development and innovations but moreover the sector at large, are still in their infant
stage.
We are lucky that we cannot only learn from the transformation processes of NGOs/
MFIs in developing countries, but also from the diverse instructive initiatives in
Europe. In order to learn from such experience further research is needed, a task
that INHolland University will be taking up the coming years. We are convinced that
reversed transfer of knowledge from the South to the North is needed, which in turn
will hopefully lead to a circular transfer process.
4.1 Awareness of many problems, but more choices need to be made
i National Council for Microfinance boosts awareness
Microfinance has found a place on the agenda of politicians, policy makers and
practitioners in the Netherlands, but this has taken time. They all refer to microcredit
and microfinance as a valuable instrument for either the promotion of
56
entrepreneurship, the improvement of urban areas and the support for the
unemployed or the promotion of social participation. The International Year of
Microcredit has stimulated thoughts about microfinance and microcredit closer to
home. Studies carried out during that year revealed that there was indeed a need
for it, that there was scope for MFIs and specialised NGOs and that there was an
advantage in ‘catching on late’ (Triodos_Facet 2007)
A special “Advisory Council on Microfinance in the Netherlands” was established by
the Ministry of Economic Affairs in early 2007. This council consists of high ranking
individuals from the public domain, the government and the private sector, including
microfinance experts. The main task of this Council is to make policy recommendations
to the Dutch government through the Minister of Economic Affairs and to formulate
solutions to improve access to microfinance in the Netherlands27. Furthermore, it
holds the role of ambassador for promotion of the use of microfinance nationwide
and of networking amongst parties active in micro-entrepreneurship development
and microfinance.
This Council has acknowledged that microfinance and microcredit have not yet
been introduced on a large scale in the Netherlands and has referred to four
problems in society that can be addressed with microfinance and microcredit:
- The need to let the unemployed participate actively in society
- The need to assist people to earn a decent, additional income
- The need to revive a selected number of urban areas28
- The need to boost entrepreneurial initiatives in society
In spite of the apparent acknowledgement of these problems, as yet no clear
choices have been made in society as to which of these to tackle or exploit with
microcredit and microfinance and on which group to target.
27 The Council supported by an Information Centre was organised by Senter Novem - of early 2008 its work will be integrated into the Microfinance Support Bureau of the Ministry of Economic Affairs.
28 The so-called “prachtwijken”, preselected urban areas that need special attention to redress degradation processes.
57
ii Unexplored segments in the market
In the past few years, a number of studies have been carried out to determine the
potential demand for microcredit and microfinance in the Netherlands. The most
recent one (SEON 2008) estimated that the potential annual demand for small
loans for micro-entrepreneurs and self employed comes to 43,508 people (with a
weighted average loan size of € 17,000). This is composed of:
- Potential demand for loans below € 15,000 from 26,105 people (with an
average loan size of € 8,000, corresponding to € 208,840,000 in total); most of
them the self-employed and
- Potential bankable demand for loans for micro-entrepreneurs from 17,403
people (with an average loan size of € 22,000, corresponding to a total portfolio
of € 382,866,000 in total)
The National Council advocates that intensified attention to microfinance must
result in an annual increase of 10.000 starting micro entrepreneurs. Microfinance
practitioners have criticised this approach since it mainly deals with support to
micro-enterprises and leaves out the many enterprising individuals who are also in
need of improved access to financial services(van Manen 2004). Apparently, there
is a blind spot in the Netherlands for the many enterprising people who could do
more with less, i.e. who would be well off if they had access to microcredit services
offering external finance in amounts less than € 5,000 to initiate their economic
activity.
Studies in 2007 by McKinsey (McKinsey 2007) for the National Council of
Microfinance indeed revealed a large demand for microfinance services. They
estimate the total market at 1.54 million29 persons; that market again can be
subdivided in different groups (see table 6). They further estimate, that out of that
group 600.000 people consider setting up a (full time) enterprise, becoming self-
employed or initiate economic activities to supplement their income (from wage
employment). If we deduct the above-mentioned (maximum) number of micro-
entrepreneurs and self-employed there is still an enormous number of people who
29 Corresponding to 15% of the economic active population.
58
only need financial support on a limited scale to initiate additional income generating
activities. For that group, no instruments and services exist yet. It offers a chance
for NGOs and specialised MFIs to introduce a modern microcredit programme with
low-cost services (using IT based product) and it calls for explicit policy in support
of such initiatives.
Table 6 Estimate of the market for microfinance in the Netherlands
280 3303.000 1.540
140
25
50
30
35
195
30
65
25
15
105
10
30
15
5
395
85
210
115
65
5
5
25
40
20
750
185
330
165
105
1.910
280
460
180
170
10
5
10
75
5
100 110
Employmentsituation
Considersstartingbusiness
Target groupformicrofinance*
Specific target groups (overlap between groups)
Loweducation
EthnicMinority
Urban districts
< 50.00050-100.000> 100.000
employment> 12 hrs/wk
employment< 12 hrs/wk
100%unemployed
Housewives/menman
Others ***
Total
* corrected for overlap** also for part-time jobs*** students pre-pension
Focus governmentinitiatives
Source McKinsey and Cy. Based on the 21minuten.nl survey (2007)
There is a large market out there, but how is it possible that projects and
organizations in the Netherlands have only extended 200 micro-loans in 2007? If
we follow the microcredit theory that demand will follow supply (M. Novak, 2005),
we must invest in programmes to offer such microfinance and meet that demand.
In 2008, the Centrum voor Microfinanciering INHolland conducted a study on the
legal and regulatory framework in which MFIs and (potential) clients should operate.
Based on the data collected and analysed, we dare to state that this demand is also
positively affected by modifications and adjustments in the regulatory framework. In
France it became evident that when legal impediments are removed or softened,
the number of clients in microcredit programmes increased notably(INHolland and
59
EMN 2008). Likewise, there is a significant increase in the number of (small/micro)
enterprises that have been started in the Netherlands after the introduction of
modifications of (fiscal) rules affecting the self-employed. In addition, we found that
in Europe laws and regulations mainly protect people on social welfare and that
these do not really stimulate them to engage in one’s own business. It also became
apparent that only a limited number of countries have got initiatives in place to
change the legal framework introducing stimulating measures. But there are
indications that people implementing rules might stop social welfare beneficiaries
from starting one’s own business, even when rules have been introduced to
stimulate the latter to do so. We believe that further research is warranted on this
topic.
The present situation in the Netherlands reveals that little thought has been given
to the changes in the labour market and the needs of a great number of people.
There is a tendency to target programmes mainly on the unemployed and on social
welfare beneficiaries. Subsequently, the following issues arise:
- There is no explicit policy in place to serve that new and vast group of
enterprising people;
- There are no NGOs/MFIs in place to reach out to the vast number of people that
might be willing to start an economic activity;
- The present set of services is not adequate, as we are not used to thinking in
terms of small financial services in large quantities. We miss the Wastora
approach in this sector30.
If we want to make effective use of microcredit and microfinance in support of the
“newly discovered” enterprising individuals and wish to ‘”create such supply and
demand”, we need to pay attention to the following three points:
- Policies for the respective target groups needs to be formulated,
- Adequate systems and organisations should be put in place
- And innovations are needed to develop new products and services.
30 Klaas and Henk Molenaar, owners of the company Wastora, were the first to see that it was profitable to sell in large quantities (household appliances) with small margins
60
4.2 Policy mainly focused on micro-enterprises and not yet imbedded
In spite of the absence of policy, microfinance is not new to the Netherlands(Lobbezoo
and Molenaar 2008). History tells us that it has always been with us. The cooperative
savings and loans schemes are deeply rooted in society and nowadays the largest
Netherlands cooperative bank, the Rabobank,31 is a global financial institution.
Quite a successful transformation process!
Studies conducted in 2007 (Triodos_Facet 2007) already mentioned that the
general banks extended numerous small and micro-loans through overdraft
facilities, personal loans and mortgages, but we have not yet succeeded in making
this perceived as microfinance. The programme of the Ministry of Social Affairs and
Employment to assist unemployed people depending on welfare benefits to start
their own business is equally relevant. Many social welfare beneficiaries have
received counselling, training and small loans to set up a new business. The main
aim is to offer the unemployed an opportunity to gain a decent income and to
become independent of social welfare. Since loans extended under this programme
almost fall within the EU defined limit of € 25,000 (the maximum loan amount is
approximately € 32,000), this programme is considered a microfinance programme,
but it was never set up as such.
Until 2007, when the first advice of the National Council on Microfinance was made
public and taken over by the Dutch government, there was no policy on microcredit
or microfinance in the Netherlands. A special “Support Bureau for Microfinance
Initiatives” became operational within the Ministry of Economic Affairs in early 2008
to translate that advice into policy.
The advice of the Council referred to groups whom they expect to be capable of
setting up micro-enterprises (not yet referring to self-employed or people that want
to generate additional income).
- The unemployed depending on social welfare
31 Once started as a small Farmers’ Cooperative Bank, now the largest Cooperative Bank in the Netherlands even with a Triple A status. This bank now started in three larger cities a micro/ starters fund under its CSR programme.
61
- People living in urban areas in special need
- young school leavers
To reach these target groups, the Council acknowledges the absence of (locally
operating) MFIs that offer services at sufficient scale and to boost local initiatives to
develop new programmes. For that reason it also recommends the creation of a
central facility that can co-finance such local microfinance programmes and
organisations. In 2008 funds have been made available, creating a central facility to
support local initiatives.32
The major focus of the new policy is to develop a system to assist starting micro-
entrepreneurs with a comprehensive programme, including promotion, coaching,
mentoring and access to formal bank lending. In this scheme, participating banks
will provide micro-loans directly, based on a pre-screened business plan and an
ex-ante guarantee. Special attention is placed on coaching and mentoring to assist
people in formulating business plans rather than in the mere provision of finance
only. This fits very well with the present way of working and thinking geared towards
small and micro business development and business start-up. It does not touch yet
on the question of how to reach the larger number of enterprising people that want
to participate in society as well, either as self-employed or by embarking upon a
small economic activity.
Striking, however, was the absence of local operators in the policy debate in the
past years. In developing countries, national policies were a result of pressure from
the main actors: the NGOs/MFIs, which existed in large numbers, and the actual
users of microcredit, who existed in even larger numbers and were becoming very
apparent in society. This has triggered numerous policy debates and dialogues,
many facilitated by the donor community. Hence, there is a clear exchange of views
and adjustments of policy between the national policy and the individual actors’
policies. This is not the case in the Netherlands, where the NGO/MFI community
engaged in microfinance or microcredit is a very loose one and almost
non-existent.
32 This follows very much the example of the MicroStart -UNDP Programme
62
For policy to reflect the actual needs and demands in the market and to develop
programmes that dovetail with such demand, the sector needs to be more organised
and participate more actively in political dialogue.
4.3 There are many banks out there but no microfinance institutions...
In the Netherlands, only four of the general banks (ING/Postbank, ABN-AMRO,
Fortis and Rabobank) and the Ministry of Social Affairs (through the municipalities)
offer microfinance on a significant scale. As yet, the banks have no special
programmes or units for microfinance operations. They tend to prefer to create
special projects and funds if they are approached to become involved (e.g. the
Rabobank and the Startersfunds in some of the big cities). Individuals can opt for
approaching specialised consumer banks such as DSB for assistance, but these
banks only offer consumer loans, which they do not register as microloans.
With financial support from the European Social Fund (in the early nineties under
Adapt and Emploi and later with Equal funding), local pilot projects and programmes
focusing on specific target groups were launched, often with a credit component.
Private organisations specialised in rendering BDS, such as training, mentoring or
coaching, have tried to incorporate microcredit programmes, but often without much
success. Getting started was not that difficult, but they faced great difficulty in
institutionalising the credit programmes and in obtaining sufficient funding to reach
a workable and sustainable scale of operations.
At present, few organisations exist that are specialised in and dedicated to providing
micro-loans/finance services. As per September 2007, not more than 12 to 20 of
these organisations and/or projects have been recorded33. None of these
organisations has a portfolio of more than 20 clients per annum. The corrected data
by the Centrum voor Microfinanciering INHolland also reveal that the sector is still
very fragile in the Netherlands (see table 7)
33 Estimates of Senter Novem, corrected by the Center voor Microfinanciering INHolland - Sept 2007
63
Table 7 Providers/channels in the Netherlands (2007)
Providers/channels Number of
organisations
Micro loans
extended
2007 2007
Microloan component 4 68
Private NBFIs specialised in microfinance37 1 13
Public programmes - local level extending
microloans
10 81
Public programme - national; extending
comprehensive services (BDS and loans)
1 61
Municipal banks with microcredit programmes 2 5
General banks with explicit microfinance
programmes
1 10
General Banks - with “hidden/ undisclosed” -
microlending
6 n.a.
Credit providers on the internet38 11 n.a.
Total 37 248
Source: Centrum voor Microfinanciering INHolland, 2008 based on data of Senter
Novem (2008)
Based on related studies (Bartels 2004; Triodos_Facet 2007) we know that about
50% of the people in need of external funding will seek support from friends and
relatives. Another 21% will be served by the banks, both directly (mainly through
overdraft facilities) and indirectly (personal consumer loans used for enterprise
development or part of mortgage loans on private houses).That leaves a relatively
small market that can be serviced by only one or two MFIs, a type of organisation
that has not yet landed in the Netherlands. The newly created Foundation for
34 The newly established (2008) Foundation Microkrediet Nederland not yet included35 Mainly consumer loan providers except for one business oriented provider (Bizner) aiming at the
higher end of market
64
Microcredit the Netherlands can perhaps become that player in the market? The
challenge for this new bank (created by the Dutch government and with financial
support from the larger banks) is to become rooted in society and supported by civil
society operators.
The role of private MFIs (even with an NGO status) in the microfinance market is
limited and most have difficulty in reaching a significant stage. For example,
organisations such as Mama Cash offering guarantees in support of microloans36
have withdrawn from the market, and others like Start St(BDS and microloans for
starting micro-entrepreneurs in Arnhem region) or STASON (microloans for migrant
entrepreneurs) did not succeed in breaking through the glass ceiling and continue
to operate at a modest or even insignificant scale. There is a verbal willingness
among private banking institutions and the public sector to (jointly) develop
microcredit or microfinance programmes and systems on a wide(r) scale, but so far
no large scale service delivery has emerged. When individuals try to set up an MFI,
a lot of attention and general support is extended, as in the case of Hands On. 37 It
is however disappointing to note that it has not resulted yet in reaching large
numbers of borrowers/ clients. This leaves space for new initiatives. The National
Council on Microfinance has acknowledged this and has voiced its concerns about
it. It is one of the reasons why it has recommended establishing a central facility
with which local initiatives can be supported and boosted. The newly proposed EU
Initiative (European Commission 2007) might indeed become a very important
facility to support these new initiatives.
Traditionally, organisations render training and advice to starting entrepreneurs.
Additionally, they have added credit to their package of services. Those two factors
are still stumbling blocks in the development of specialised MFIs. Assessing the
programmes of the existing organizations reveal that the present organisations
have no explicit plans to extend financial services to the many self-employed who
enter(ed) the market, nor are there organisations prepared to support the untapped
reservoir of individuals who wish to generate some additional income (next to social
36 Mama Cash has been successful in operating a guarantee scheme for women entrepreneurs37 The first private initiative to set up a Microfinance Institution in the Netherlands; operating mainly
in Amsterdam region
65
benefits or job seekers allowance) by means of a small economic activity. This
might create opportunities for new approaches and systems based on IT and the
Internet. Acknowledging the intensive use of IT-based systems and the level of
computer literacy amongst the Dutch population, we may anticipate (and may even
stimulate) the development of new, innovate approaches rather than the emergence
of new organisations.
4.4 Microfinance services not yet tailored to new groups in the market
As yet, no specific microcredit or microfinance programmes of any significance
have been developed in the Netherlands, either by locally operating non-governmental
banks or by other organisations, and there are no special products or services in
the market.
Institutions and banks involved in developing and setting up business start-up
programmes tend to claim that these are microcredit/ finance programmes.
However, closer assessment reveals that this is usually not the case and that they
are merely starters financing schemes(Triodos_Facet 2007).
Some of the main Dutch banks (ABN AMRO, ING, Rabobank and Fortis) have the
biggest share of the small business (start-up) loans, which could be labelled
microloans if one would adopt the EU definition (with its limit set at € 25,000). The
extremely low number of small loans extended by other banks is negligible in
comparison. Furthermore, these other banks usually do not provide start-up
financing.
A more extensive analysis reveals that the current account loan (overdraft facility)
prevails in the Netherlands. Personal loans are also commonly used by people to
finance the set-up of a micro-business or other economic activity. But, as banks do
not register on the use of personal loans by micro-entrepreneurs as such, it is
impossible to get quantitative data on this.
Banks use simplified systems in which the assessment of an application for a
microcredit is based on various - standard - criteria, such as age, current work and
income and education. Indirectly, also the place of residence and business location
66
is taken into account. These systems were developed with cost reduction and risk
minimisation in mind and intended to speed up decision making on small loans.
This means that presently, financial services are not developed based on an
analysis of the financial needs of the new start-up, let alone of the self-employed or
of other enterprising people.
Even for start-up financing the present systems are not that adequate. Firstly, they
actually need longer term funding to supplement their own relatively limited
contribution. Secondly, the new start-up will need permanent funding for working
capital, with a facility for absorbing unforeseen events in the start-up phase. This is
the period in which the pressure on liquidity has to be low, as the earning capacity
of the business is still modest. Thus, there is a need for low initial repayments.
Some Municipal Banks (GKBs), which until recently were solely concerned with
debt restructuring, have started to extend (micro- loans. Data on the current start-up
projects in which these GKBs participate show that the number of borrowers, at
least for the time being, is not large. In the long term, their limited mandate and
budgets could become a problem.
Since enterprise development is the prime concern of most organisations, coaching
and mentoring potential entrepreneurs are seen as essential services. It also
pre-supposes that well designed applications for microcredit and improved
preparation of the prospective entrepreneurs and their plans will result in fewer
rejections.
To assist those who wish to become self-employed and those who intend to initiate
a micro-activity and need relatively small amounts (not exceeding € 3,000 to 4,000),
no services have yet been developed in either a formal or structural way.
4.5 Searching for know-how across bordersIn the studies on microfinance in the Netherlands (Triodos_Facet 2007), it was
already clear that (i) the products developed were not yet tailored to the “micro-
borrower”, be it the self-employed or the person in need of very small loans for an
(additional) income generating activity, (ii) in the product development process, little
use was made of positive or negative microfinance experience from abroad, and (iii)
limited attention was paid to IT-based systems/services.
67
There are some major changes taking place in our society and in the labour market.
First, society is becoming more diverse, hence the plea for more mainstream
thinking and less target-group-specific product development. Secondly lifelong
employment and lifelong entrepreneurship will not be perceived as being as
intensive as they used to be in the past amongst the younger generations, and (pre)
retirement will not imply that one will stop working. On the contrary, the built-up
skills, expertise and savings serve as assets for new entry into the labour market
but this time as one’s own boss. People will opt for part-time self-employment or
even part-time entrepreneurship. Therefore, financial products and services need to
be adapted to such needs. And thirdly, more people want to become active citizens
and do not accept to remain socially excluded. They will demand more outspokenly
for services enabling them to participate in society.
The new target groups for microcredit and microfinance will be more varied and
each opts for its own type of economic activity and business venture:
- The socially excluded look for ways to combine the social benefits with income
generating activities;
- The young professionals look at self-employment not as a career, but as a
temporary activity;
- The housewives and househusbands - even or maybe just those who have not
been registered as “unemployed”” - look for ways to initiate small economic
activities that would allow them to generate additional income, albeit on a small
scale;
- The part time employed will look for ways to generate additional income through
part-time self-employment and small economic activities
To develop the microfinance sector in the Netherlands in line with the demands of
those target groups, we can look at developments in developing countries and
Europe. These people in turn can opt for three “careers”:
- First there are the (young) starting entrepreneurs, people who want to set up a
micro or small enterprise that will generate full income for them. This is a group
to be attended to by the banking sector more actively. That sector must then
adjust its evaluation procedures, risk assessment methods and develop new
68
products; a task not too hard to take up as demonstrated in earlier studies
(Triodos Facet 2007)
- Secondly we have the self-employed, a growing group in the Netherlands (de
Zelfstandige Zonder Personeel ZZP); an option for many who wish to be their
own boss for a certain period in their career, and lesst often in life-long self
employment. It is a sector with a variety of demands for financial products, not
necessarily just loans for working capital or small investment. They also need
special insurances, guarantees, transfer facilities or for instance pre-financing
for tenders. This is an area where organisations with an innovative culture can
flourish, definitely a market for well organised Microfinance Institutions. It takes
public and private support to set up those organisations and to cover (part of)
the operational costs. They can only be sustainable as long as all stakeholders
believe in the relevance and effectiveness of the work undertaken. Charging the
clients for all costs will not be possible or socially or ethically acceptable.
- And thirdly the many enterprising people who wish to generate some additional
income on top of wages from part-time employment or social welfare benefits.
In numbers this is a very large group; it comprises all kind of people: housewives
and housemen. Formally employed persons (either in the public or private
sector), people on a sabbatical, underemployed people, students and drop-
outs, (early) retired citizens. It is group that can be aided by very small financial
services of a wide variety; an area where we need innovations both in
technological and organisational way. There is a need for product development
that will result in the offer of very low transaction costs, for products offered in a
large scale via IT-based systems. And those products will be offered by
organisations capable of adapting themselves to that market; most probably
those will be private organisations operating without much public support. On a
limited scale support might be effective in the design stages only.
All three identified client groups comprise social welfare beneficiaries and people in
(part-time) wage employment. In the first two groups these persons might be willing
to give up their social welfare benefit expecting sufficient income from the business
ventures, in the third one definitely not.
69
To boost the micro-enterprises the banking sector seems to be the adequate
channel. Here we can definitely draw from experience abroad rather than inventing
the wheel again. Downscaling some of the financing operations seem to be the
most effective option: there is definitely no space in the Netherlands for a specialised
micro or small enterprise bank. The present banks are challenged to draw from the
experiences in developing countries with such down-scaling approaches. If
necessary the public sector can assist them in that process taking away special
bottlenecks (for instance by widening the scope of operations of the present
guarantee facilities and in stimulating them to develop new products and design of
staff training programmes) but their resource basis is strong enough to pick up that
bill.
For the other two groups the challenge is to stimulate the creation of new institutions
and the development of new products. Given the size of the market and the specific
target groups to aim at - the self-employed, enterprising person - there is only room
for one or two new MFIs attending the self employed in the Netherlands,
Development of financial products tailored to the need of these target groups is the
prime area of attention; a growing number of MFIs in the South are presently
engaged in similar innovation processes. Setting up platform to exchange
experience in this area will speed up the product development process. The position
of the ZZPer in the Netherlands market is rather exceptional and deserves special
attention. Comparing developments in other European countries and in some
developing countries can generate new insights. Sharing that experience can also
help us developing one or two sustainable MFIs.
For the third group there is - only - room for locally operating NGOs that explore
market opportunities. Especially when it comes to linking the informal economy and
informal society with the formal one the local NGOs are still needed. Once they
have detected new market opportunities they must then be capable of developing
the required products or transferring the market to a third party that can offer the
services on large scale at low costs.
Policy that reflects the specific market segmentation as depicted here does not yet
exist, nor have we embarked upon the related institutional development and
70
product innovation processes. In developing countries NGOs and MFIs have been
confronted with similar challenges and have already actively sought solutions.
Particularly in the area of product development and innovations much can be
learned. We may consider ourselves lucky; our lack of initiatives over the past years
now gives us an opportunity to speed up processes.
71
5 Microfinance for enterprising people: new markets demand changes in thinking
The analysis of developments in developing countries, Europe and The Netherlands
where microcredit and microfinance have emerged, are promoted and grow in
different ways show consistency and logic on the one hand and great differences
on the other hand. While in developing countries there is a logical interrelationship
between awareness, policy, institutional development and product/ service
development such is not the case in Europe and the Netherlands. But in all three
areas the actors are struggling with changes in the labour markets and asking how
best to serve the different client groups in those markets. MFIs in developing
countries have left open spaces, inciting new initiatives to serve the poor and
excluded people better. Similarly changes that have taken place in our society and
labour market (in the Netherlands) in terms of mobility, diversity and globalisation
call for redefining our client groups and the development of new approaches.
The past years the awareness that microfinance in the Netherland deserves
attention and needs to be introduced has definitely increased. The initiatives taken
at central level in society have been quite adequate. Policies now need to be
developed and imbedded in society. Contrary to the development in the South the
initiatives to raise awareness and the policy dialogue have not been a result of
pressure from the practitioners and people in the field. For a consistent development
and a proper reflection of the real problems faced by the target groups such
imbedding is indeed a prerequisite for effective programmes to be put in place,
adequate (demand-driven) product development and the setting up and growth of
the right organisations. The challenge is to adopt policies and programmes that
reflect the actual segmentation in society and meet the needs of the various groups
in search for external financial services. And to develop the proper channels.
We can reinvent the wheel to meet such diverse and changing demands from
enterprising people, or we can build upon what has already been learned. Drawing
upon experience in the South and adapting that to our conditions are needed. After
proper systematising and documenting we can share our insights and ideas again
72
with our partners in Europe and beyond, thus initiating a circular process of sharing
technology South-North-South rather than transferring South-North or vice versa. A
challenge that we at the Centrum voor Microfinanciering INHolland want to take up
in the coming years.
5.1 There might be something wrong in logicMicrofinance in developing countries, its evolution and the growth of organisations
has developed gradually. The question arises whether such processes can be
transferred to the Netherlands. In developing countries awareness has grown
gradually and the various stakeholders have influenced each other over time.
Together they have understood the interrelationship between the various problems
and the need to develop policy for the various areas of attention.
Microfinance has developed, as there are well-formulated policies in place,
accompanied by adequate theories. These policies and theories are practice-based
and widely accepted by the various stakeholders in the field and at the top level.
However, most of the policy dialogue and formulation took place in the field, with
the practitioners playing a dominant role.
Organisational development has been a gradual and logical one. Organisations
have adjusted themselves to changes in the economy and to the members of the
target/client groups. When before, the destitute poor person was the receiver of
credit offered, the organisations (MFIs and banks) now need to deal with the
enterprising self-employed and micro- or small entrepreneur. Organisations needed
to be set up and assisted in this development process. Even the absence of
financial intermediaries has to be tackled by the creation of new ones, in large
numbers. (see table 8)
Tab
le 8
C
ompa
red
evol
utio
n; a
war
enes
s, p
olic
y, in
stitu
tions
, se
rvic
es a
nd t
arge
t gr
oups
Evo
luti
on
s in
dev
elo
pin
g
cou
ntr
ies
Evo
luti
on
in E
uro
pe
Evo
luti
on
in t
he
Net
her
lan
ds
Aw
aren
ess
leve
l
Con
sist
ent p
roce
ss fr
om p
over
ty
alle
viat
ion
to d
evel
opm
ent f
inan
cial
inst
itutio
ns to
all-
incl
usiv
e sy
stem
s
At E
urop
ean
leve
l foc
us o
n bo
th s
ocia
l
incl
usio
n an
d en
trep
rene
ursh
ip (
Lisb
on
agen
da)
- to
p do
wn
tend
ency
Aw
aren
ess
at c
entr
al le
vel b
oth
focu
sed
on e
ntre
pren
eurs
hip
and
redu
cing
dep
ende
ncy
on s
ocia
l
wel
fare
Po
licy
leve
lP
olic
y de
velo
pmen
t at a
ll le
vels
with
ofte
n cl
ear
botto
m u
p pr
oces
ses
and
stro
ng in
fluen
ce o
f act
ors
and
civi
l
soci
ety
Few
nat
iona
l gov
ernm
ents
dev
elop
natio
nal p
olic
ies
Pro
vide
rs w
ith d
iver
se
polic
ies.
Pol
icy
not i
mbe
dded
due
to w
eak
part
icip
atio
n of
civ
il so
ciet
y an
d ac
tors
Pol
icie
s de
velo
ped
at n
atio
nal l
evel
emer
ging
with
focu
s m
ainl
y on
supp
ort o
f sta
rtin
g m
icro
ente
rpris
es
Inst
itu
tio
nal
leve
l
Logi
cal a
nd c
onsi
sten
t dev
elop
men
t
of N
GO
s, M
FIs
, NB
- F
I evo
lvin
g in
to
(reg
ulat
ed)
bank
s an
d fin
anci
al
inte
rmed
iarie
s
Div
erse
set
of o
rgan
isat
ions
with
out c
lear
deve
lopm
ent p
atte
rns
Sea
rchi
ng fo
r lin
kage
s be
twee
n N
GO
s
and
Ban
king
sec
tor
Wea
k N
GO
and
MF
I sec
tor
with
limite
d sc
ale
of o
pera
tions
Str
ong
bank
ing
netw
orks
(no
t
activ
ely
enga
ged)
Pro
du
cts
and
serv
ices
Fro
m s
ingl
e -
supp
ly d
riven
- p
rodu
ct
to w
ide
rang
e of
pro
duct
s be
ing
deve
lope
d fo
r al
l kin
d of
clie
nt g
roup
s
New
tech
nolo
gies
bei
ng a
pplie
d
Mai
nly
prod
ucts
for
the
mic
ro e
nter
pris
e
sect
or
Mai
nly
for
mic
ro e
nter
pris
es a
nd
with
bia
s to
war
ds tr
aini
ng a
nd
coac
hing
Tar
get
an
d
clie
nt
gro
up
s
(ad
dit
ion
al
rem
arks
)
Cle
ar s
egm
enta
tion
of th
e m
arke
t
with
slig
ht te
nden
cy to
leav
e sp
aces
to a
ttend
the
very
poo
r
Sta
rtin
g m
icro
ent
repr
eneu
rs w
ith
pref
eren
ce fo
r sp
ecia
l tar
get g
roup
s
(wom
en, m
igra
nts)
and
peo
ple
on s
ocia
l
wel
fare
(W
este
rn E
urop
e) o
r so
cial
ly
excl
uded
(E
aste
rn a
nd C
entr
al E
urop
e)
Mai
nly
star
ting
mic
ro
entr
epre
neur
s; th
e se
lf em
ploy
ed
com
ing
up fa
st; n
o cl
ear
pict
ure
of
the
low
er e
nd o
f the
mar
ket
73
74
In the North the situation is slightly different: there are a significant number of
financial intermediaries, albeit that the majority of those will not take steps to open
up for the new - small - clients, enterprising though they might be. The present
institutional network is focused traditionally on assisting small or medium enterprises,
not so much the entrepreneur let alone the new self-employed. Business
development and hence its financing is the main area of attention and servicing the
enterprising self-employed is still a new area. New approaches and organisations
are needed.
The question remains whether the creation of intermediaries with a top-down
approach, whether these are MFIs or banks, will work. The lessons to learn are
contradictory: in the majority of situations the answer is no, but the rare exception
(Mibanco, Peru38) shows us the opposite. With the Netherlands Government putting
great efforts in creating the “Foundation for Microcredit the Netherlands” this is
definitely an area that requires in-depth study.
In the South, product development has been a very logical one: what started as
microcredit - often as group-based systems and more of a consumer/household
type of credit -, has evolved into microfinance. MFIs and specialised banks offer a
wide range of financial products such as savings, insurances, leasing, transfer
facilities and seek cooperation with BDS support organisations for the non-financial
services. In the North we need to follow a similar path to serve the (temporarily self-
employed). But equally important are product development and innovation if we
want to reach out to the many people in need for financial services to finance their
income generating activities.
Related to this, we can learn a lot about sustainability. In the South, for quite some
time now, due to the absence (of adequately functioning) financial intermediaries,
most attention went to the build-up of organisations. The prime focus has been on
the sustainability of the organisation, the instrument, and not on the clients. Clients
have become more aware of this and are more assertive nowadays. They will speak
out against the practice of charging them for all the costs, costs that are considered
38 MiBanco is a successful microfinance provider that experienced significant growth after it was pushed by the Peruvian Government to become leader in the market in the nineties
75
too high and detrimental to the chance of survival of the business. In the
Netherlands, there is a broad understanding that this needs to be avoided, hence
no exorbitant interest rates are charged. In Europe, social economic thinking allows
us to solve this, getting stakeholders involved in co-financing the support
mechanisms. Here, the South can learn from us that the prime concern in both the
North and the South should be the sustainability of the businesses set up. In this
case, the South can learn from our experience in this field.
5.2 Microfinance channels, enterprising people and the socially excluded, new choices to make
At first sight, the problems in developing countries and in our own society seem to
be quite different. On the one hand, there is the issue of extreme poverty and
absence of organisations offering the right services to people who wish to break
away from that poverty. On the other hand, there is the need to stimulate more
people to participate in society with a changing labour market and to make the
society at large more enterprising/entrepreneurial.
In developing countries and in Europe there are two apparently different, but in
essence similar developments taken place. These developments will determine the
future of the microfinance industry. Timely reacting to both of these developments
is required.
- There are a growing number of - more assertive - enterprising people who wish
to be self-employed and who seek appropriate services, and
- There are a very large number of socially excluded, often poor, people who wish
to initiate economic activities (often of a temporary nature) that might generate
additional income to the household.
For both groups we need the proper instruments and channels. The self-employed
and the micro-entrepreneurs are in search of financial services at an affordable cost
that will provide support for the set-up of a sustainable business venture, and the
poor and socially excluded need easy access to financial support in small amounts
at low cost.
76
i The self-employed in need for appropriate microfinance (institutions)
The self-employed are becoming important and are in search of new MFIs. In the
South, when income is needed but cannot be found at the formal private and public
labour market, there are the options for survival economic activities or micro-
enterprises. In the North, because the labour and enterprise markets are changing,
both lifelong employment and lifelong entrepreneurship are gradually disappearing.
Being enterprising will be helpful. One minute one will be employed, the next minute
this will be interrupted by self-employment or becoming one’s own boss. Again, the
latter might be for a fixed period with reversal of the employment status.
Both types of self-employed are in need of other financial services than the ones
offered by the regular organisations. Therefore, there is a need for new and different
products and most certainly for other organisations to offer these.
In the South, this shift has been accepted and this awareness has formed a basis
for policy dialogue between all the stakeholders. That in itself was the basis for the
necessary programme and product development and related organisational
developments. (see figure 7)
In the North we need to accept that self-employment will not be for one’s entire life,
as it can be interrupted by formal employment, and the same can happen in the
South. Improving economic conditions will generate new opportunities on the labour
market. That will be attractive for those who opted for self-employment as a new
career option and will be accompanied by changes in the types of services needed:
next to micro-loans, the entrepreneur expects the MFI to offer additional services
such as guarantees, money transfer, payment facilities, insurances, pensions,
factoring and leasing. Therefore, the MFI will need to diversify its services and
existing organisations will need to be prepared for new demands. This is a process
that will take place in the Netherlands, where the number of self-employed is rising
fast.
77
Figure 7 Comparison and anticipated evolution in developing countries, Europe
and the Netherlands
Additional income
generating activities
Self Employed
MicroEnterprise
SmallEnterprise
Medium scale
Enterpris
Developing countries
Traditional area for NGOs;new area for NGOs with social innovation Technology innovations
MFIs graduated from NGOs
NB - FI and MF Banks
Future area for general (and inter-national) banks entering the market
Europe Technology innovations by private companies and locally based NGOs for target group speciffic / ad hoc operations
MFIs specially set up to attend the sector
Alliances between MFIs / NGOs and Banks
Traditional area for banks
The Netherlands
Technology innovations by private companies and locally based NGOs for target group speciffic / ad hoc operations
Micro finance by one or two specialised MFIs
Banks with down-scalling operations
Traditional area for banks
The question is whether and what we can learn from MFIs in the South. We need
to study how they deal with two different organisational development processes:
- The pattern whereby NGOs following their development stimulate the graduation
of the more successful entrepreneurial people who wish to develop into micro
or even small entrepreneur, and
- The process of downscaling financial operations of existing banks that see a
new market opportunity.
78
Both processes take place in developing countries and contain lessons that can be
attractive to us.
But we might also opt for a new approach, e.g.
- Developing a new type of MFIs that is geared towards the needs of that client
group
This is a process not yet found in developing countries. The lessons from the past
can indeed be instructive for other countries, so maybe it is not only a reverse
transfer of technology but a circular one?
ii The enterprising economic and socially excluded call for innovative
approaches
Our conviction that microcredit and microfinance can develop entrepreneurship and
create enterprises brings along a danger of neglecting the plight of the many poor
and socially excluded. Not all people are bank-worthy, or even credit-worthy. While
there are many people stepping forward to start a micro-enterprise or to become
self-employed, large numbers of poor and socially excluded will still need support.
In Western Europe/the Netherlands we have not yet found an answer to this
challenge and neither have we explicitly acknowledged the opportunity that lies
ahead of us: a large segment of the marked is as yet unattended, without
organisations offering services, maybe even a segment that calls for completely
new approaches. This segment might be better off if we dare to break away from
the traditional ways of thinking and step “out of the box”: It should be seen as a new
challenge for microfinance policy makers and practitioners. Innovative IT and
Internet-based lending systems such as KIVA MYC4you; Prosper Booper, Bizner
may be the solution.
In developing countries we see that the shift of MFIs towards the micro-enterprise
sector creates new gaps in the system. This entails the danger that the poorer
clients originally helped with a microcredit are now left aside again. This is not
merely solved with the entrance of new NGOs filling the space left by the former
ones, now graduated into self-sustainable MFIs. It also offers opportunities to
79
introduce new systems and services. Technological innovations offer new chances
to launch products that can reach even more people at very low costs. That might
be an answer to one of the most important challenges for us: develop systems
whereby the sustainability of the client becomes of prime concern, not the
sustainability of the instrument.
5.3 Can the reversed path South to North become a circular process?
There are people who claim that, if we want to serve to the poor, it will be better to
continue focusing solely on microcredit. Others prefer to talk about microfinance
and promote a self-sustainable microfinance sector, and yet another group tends to
put emphasis on the sustainability of the economic activities made possible and set
up by the enterprising people with the microfinance. The sector has become a
visible and mature one, and so are the opinions and visions: manifold and hopefully
applicable on our own society as well.
In order to carry on the debate properly without harming what has already been
achieved by the restless efforts of so many, we need to critically study and research
the sector, the industry proper and the organisations operating in it. This will lead to
improved functioning and an effective use of the instruments. Hopefully, it will
eventually lead to systems that contribute to real sustainable development and
support clients in setting up sustainable business ventures.
From the developments in the South we can conclude that we have to be careful in
copying processes: (I) there is no scope for the traditional microcredit programmes
with very small loans The social welfare systems, the costs of living and the level of
required income (to meet daily costs) are clear limiting factors. There is just no
scope for it in our own society. However, when it comes to microfinance, we can
indeed learn a lot from the up-scaling and down-scaling processes that have taken
place in various countries. Even more important, however, is the recognition that the
need of the enterprising self-employed will determine the future for the microfinance
sector. These needs of the self-employed are to be met by new services and
microfinance-developing institutions interested to aid this group. It is a market
segment that offers chances for incumbent MFIs to become (self)-sustainable as
80
well. Secondly we need to be creative in designing systems to reach the very large
numbers of people that can be assisted with very small loan amounts provided rules
and legislation will allow people to earn such additional income on top of wages
from part-time employment or limited social welfare benefits,
This will be the challenge in the Netherlands: will we see new MFIs attending to
such needs, and will we dare to go that one step further and set up systems to
extend very small amounts. This will also be the challenge in developing countries:
will MFIs be willing to move further towards the enterprising self-employed rather
than the micro- entrepreneurs? Will the NGO community be in a position to develop
the right systems to continue serving that part of society that benefited so much
from microcredit, but this time at a reasonable cost? The Centrum voor
Microfinanciering has set up a research programme in that respect. Among other
plans we will start a study on the development of IT-based technologies to extend
micro-finance to large numbers of people in small amounts (at local/ municipal
level), we will set up an MFI directly linked to the Centrum39 where we will test target
group specific lending technologies, and we plan to study the actual microfinance
needs of the self-employed.
We can learn from the past and we can learn from the work that has been done in
other countries. The challenge is to do so and to plough the lessons learned back
into our own society. The path to follow will take an opposite direction from what is
usually expected, from the South to the North. At INHolland, we have chosen to
follow the path in this opposite direction. Too often, in my opinion, we claim that we
can bring more knowledge and expertise to the South. This is usually warranted,
given the technological and knowledge gaps that have grown between societies
over time, but in certain sectors this is not so. Microfinance is such a sector. We will
systematise lessons learned, assess under which conditions mechanisms and
programmes operated effectively and appraise how we can adjust things to the
specific social, cultural and economic conditions in our own society. We will achieve
this through a joint research projects with our colleagues in Europe and in the many
countries with experience with microfinance and microcredit. Working with people
39 A so-called leer MFI where students can gain hands-on experience during internships and final examination studies. This MFI will be jointly set up with other interested parties
81
in the field, we will subsequently design new systems, adapting existing ones to the
conditions under which microfinance operates in the Netherlands. Applied research
of the new programmes put in place will be initiated thereafter by INHolland. The
newly acquired insight will be made available to other practitioners and policymakers.
But more importantly, it will serve as input for the education programmes that we
operate and that we expect will yield highly qualified professionals.
82
Reference literature
Bartels (2004). Klein krediet in Nederland.
Boúúart, M. (2008). “A Billion to Gain, The Next Phase.”
CGAP (2008). “Are we overestimating demand?”
EMN. (2008). “EMN - About us.” from http://www.european-microfinance.org.
European_Commission (2007). A European Initiative for the development of
microcredit in support of growth and development
Everts, J. and S. Lahn (2006). “Status of Microfinance in Western Europe, an
Academic Review.”
Gosses, A., N. Molenaar, et al. (1989). Small Enterprises, New Approaches, DGIS,
Operations review unit, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, The Netherlands.
Hulme, D. and K. Moore (2006). “Why has microfinance been a policy success in
Bangladesh and beyond “: 10-12.
INHolland and EMN (2008). Study on legislation and regulations governing the
microfinance industry and its users, France. Centrum voor Microfinanciering.
INHolland, Centrum voor Microfinanciering (2008). The Microfinance sector in
selected countries and their regulatory frameworks (Pakistan, Uganda, Bolivia,
France).
Jayo, B., S. Rico, et al. (2008). Overview of the Microcredit Sector in the European
Union. EMN Working paper. 5.
Keddy, J., S. Nanjundan, et al. (1988). RSIE, Development of Rural Small Industrial
Enterprise, Lessons from Experience, Netherlands Government.
Little, I. M. D., D. Mazumdar, et al. (1987). Small manufacturing enterprises : a
comparative study of India and other economies. New York ; Oxford University
Press [for] the World Bank,.
Lobbezoo, M. and N. Molenaar (2008). Microfinance in the Netherlands, Foro
Nantik Lum.
McKinsey (2007). Microfinance sector analysis in the Netherlands,.
Microfinance Information eXchange, I. M. (2007). “How Many MFIs and Borrowers
Exist?”
Middlesex, U. B. S. (2000). “Young Entrepreneurs, Women Entrepreneurs, Ethnic
Minority Entrepreneurs and Co-Entrepreneurs in the European Union and Central
and Eastern Europe.”
83
Molenaar, N. and N. Espejo (1998). The Myths of Microcredit. Time for reflection.
Molenaar, N. (2005). Institutional development based on the APIS Model.
Molenaar, N. and G. Hofstede (1998). Tomorrow holds another future, Salient
points and lessons learned from Income Generating Activities Promotion and
Support Programmes carried out by the Netherlands based Co-Financing
Agencies.
Rhyne, E. and M. Otero (2006). “Microfinance through the next Decade: visioning
the Who, What, Where, When and How.” ACCION Working papers.
Schumacher, E. F. (1973). Small is Beautiful, A Study of Economics as if People
Mattered, Blond and Briggs.
SEON (2008). Micro Finance Study in the Netherlands, demand and supply: 38.
Sievers, M. (2004). “Synergies through linkages: who benefits from linking Finance
and Business Development Services?.” SEED Working Papers.
Triodos Facet (2007). Microfinance in the Netherlands: Uncharted territory.
Opportunities and challenges.
Triodos Facet and IMES (2008). Entrepreneurial Diversity in a Unified Europe,
Ethnic Minority Entrepreneurship and Migrant Entrepreneurship.
Underwood, T. (2006). Overview of the Microcredit Sector in Europe 2004-2005.
EMN Working paper. 4.
UNDP (2006). Building Inclusive Financial Sectors for Development
Van Maanen, G. (2004). Microcredit, Sound Business or Development
Instrument?
Vossen, M. (2007). “Microkrediet, hoe het werkelijk werkt.” Vice Versa 41-4:
10-17.
84
Lectoraat Microfinance and Small Enterprise Development
www.INHolland.nl/Microfinanciering
Microfinance, (only) for enterprising people? ... a diverse market requires a novel approach ...
Drs. Klaas Molenaar