research paper on contribution of microfinance toward inclusive growth

1

CONTRIBUTION OF MICROFINANCE TOWARDS

INCLUSIVE GROWTH

Mr. Maurya Rambali R.

M.COM., M.PHIL., LLB., NET(COMMERCE)

[email protected]

9769539813

c/109. Kunal kutir A,

Navghar Road, Bhayandar(E),

Mumbai-401105

ABSTRACT

Growth is inclusive when it creates economic opportunities along with ensuring equal

access to them. There are supply side and demand side factors driving Inclusive

Growth. Banks and other financial services players largely are expected to mitigate the

access to the financial system. Microfinance institutions are the significant contributors

in economic development of a country.

The aim of this paper is to enrich the growth and regulation of Microfinance

Institutions (MFI) in India. It also highlights the components of assets and liabilities of

these institutions. This is also an attempt to judge the financial and operational

performance of these institutions from the year 2008 -2012. In the present study

statistical tools like, trend analysis, ratios, percentages, mean, standard deviation will be

used for descriptive analysis. To accomplish the research objectives, data has been

mined from MIX market (www.mixmarket.org) a (Non- Profit Organization), NABARD,

Sa-Dhan, CGAP. Data regarding financial performance various ratios and variables are

taken into consideration. This work concludes that the performance of MFI’s in the

period under the study is significant and MFI’s contributes significantly for inclusive

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.mixmarket.org/

2

growth in India. The study considers selected variables and ratios, there are scope to

expand the study by considering remained variables and ratios for analyzing financial

performances. Here only financial performances of MFI’s are studied. More research is

needed on the performances of MFI by considering other variable and ratios and

analysis of social performance is also required. This paper will be useful for financial

institutions, portfolio managers, wealth managers and other investors as well as

regulators who wish to have better understanding of MFIs and this will assist MFI’s to

improve their financial performance.

Key words: Microfinance Institutions, Financial performance, Ratio, Inclusive Growth

Paper type: Research paper

3

1. INTRODUCTION

Inclusive growth is a concept which advances equitable opportunities for economic participants

during the process of economic growth with benefits incurred by every section of society. The

definition of inclusive growth implies direct links between the macroeconomic and

microeconomic determinants of the economy and economic growth. The inclusive growth

approach takes a longer-term perspective, as the focus is on productive employment as a means

of increasing the incomes of poor and excluded groups and raising their standards of living.

Inclusive growth focuses on economic growth which is a necessary and crucial condition for

poverty reduction. It should also be inclusive of the large part of the country’s labor force, where

inclusiveness refers to equality of opportunity in terms of access to markets, resources and

unbiased regulatory environment for businesses and individuals. Inclusive growth focuses on

productive employment rather than income redistribution. Hence the focus is not only on

employment growth but also on productivity growth. Inclusive growth is not defined in terms of

specific targets such as employment generation or income distribution. These are potential

outcomes, not specific goals.

The term "microfinance," once associated almost exclusively with small-value loans to

the poor, is now increasingly used to refer to a broad array of products (including payments,

savings, and insurance) tailored to meet the particular needs of low-income individuals. People

living in poverty, like everyone else, need a diverse range of financial services to run their

businesses, build assets, smooth consumption, and manage risks. Microfinance is a source of

financial services for entrepreneurs and small businesses lacking access to banking and related

services. The two main mechanisms for the delivery of financial services to such clients are: (1)

relationship-based banking for individual entrepreneurs and small businesses; and (2) group-

based models, where several entrepreneurs come together to apply for loans and other services as

a group.

A microfinance institution acquires permission to lend through registration. Each legal

structure has different formation requirements and privileges. Microfinance institutions in India

are registered as one of the following five entities:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_growth

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_services

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banking

4

on Government Organizations engaged in microfinance (NGO-MFIs), comprised of

Societies and Trusts

-level cooperative acts, the national level

multi-state cooperative legislation Act (MSCA 2002 ), or under the new state-level mutually

aided cooperative acts (MACS Act)

-for-profit)

-profit Non-Banking Financial Companies (NBFCs)

-MFIs

For some, microfinance is a movement whose object is "a world in which as many poor

and near-poor households as possible have permanent access to an appropriate range of high

quality financial services, including not just credit but also savings, insurance, and fund

transfers."[1]

Many of those who promote microfinance generally believe that such access will

help poor people out of poverty, including participants in the Microcredit Summit Campaign. For

others, microfinance is a way to promote economic development, employment and growth

through the support of micro-entrepreneurs and small businesses. Microfinance is a broad

category of services, which includes microcredit. Microcredit is provision of credit services to

poor clients.

The inclusive growth approach takes a longer term perspective as the focus is on

productive employment rather than on direct income redistribution, as a means of increasing

incomes for excluded groups. Inclusive growth is, therefore, supposed to be inherently

sustainable as distinct from income distribution schemes which can in the short run reduce the

disparities, between the poorest and the rest..Growth is inclusive when it creates economic

opportunities along with ensuring equal access to them. Apart from addressing the issue of

inequality, the inclusive growth may also make the poverty reduction efforts more effective by

explicitly creating productive economic opportunities for the poor and vulnerable sections of the

society. The inclusive growth by encompassing the hitherto excluded population can bring in

several other benefits as well to the economy.

There are supply side and demand side factors driving Inclusive Growth. Banks and other

financial services players largely are expected to mitigate the supply side processes that prevent

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_movement

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Savings

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insurance

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remittances

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remittances

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microfinance#cite_note-1

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poverty

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microcredit_Summit_Campaign

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microcredit

5

poor and disadvantaged social groups from gaining access to the financial system. Access to

financial products is constrained by several factors which include: lack of awareness about the

financial products, unaffordable products, high transaction costs, and products which are not

convenient, inflexible, not customized and of low quality. Financial Inclusion promotes thrift and

develops culture of saving and also enables efficient payment mechanism strengthening the

resource base of the financial institution which benefits the economy as resources become

available for efficient payment mechanism and allocation. If we are talking of financial stability,

economic stability and inclusive growth with stability, it is not possible without achieving

Financial Inclusion. Thus financial inclusion is no longer a policy choice but is a policy

compulsion today. And banking is a key driver for inclusive growth. However, we must bear in

mind that apart from the supply side factors, demand side factors, such as lower income and /or

asset holdings also have a significant bearing on inclusive growth. Owing to difficulties in

accessing formal sources of credit, poor individuals and small and macro enterprises usually rely

on their personal savings or internal sources to invest in health, education, housing, and

entrepreneurial activities to make use of growth opportunities.

2 PROBLEMS OF THE STUDY

The problem of this research paper is to enrich the growth and contribution of

Microfinance Institutions (MFI) in inclusive growth of India, during the year 2008 to 2012.

3 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

The objectives of the present study are as follows:

1) To analyze the financial performance and growth of MFI’s in India.

2) To examine contribution of MFI’s towards Inclusive Growth in India.

4. HYPOTHESIS OF THE STUDY

The following are hypotheses related to present study.

Hypothesis 1

H0: There is no significance difference between the ratios of MFI from the year 2008 to

2012 in India.

H0: There is significance difference between the ratios of MFI from the year 2008 to

2012 in India.

6

5. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY OF THE STUDY

The research methodology of the study consists of:

a) Sample frame

b) Selection of the sample

c) Data required

d) Sources of Data

e) Research Variables for analysis

f) Statistical tools

a) SAMPLE FRAME:

The sample frame is the list of target population. The sample frame in this study is

all Micro financial institutions in India.

b) SELECTION OF THE SAMPLE:

For the purpose of the study researcher has taken 17 MFI working in India. For

the present study researcher has obtained the names of the MFI from Mixmarket

website, an organisation which has reliable and authentic source of information

relating to MFI’s of different countries.

c) DATA REQUIRED:

Study is empirical in nature because it depends upon the collected data, therefore

researcher require such data which shows the financial performance like financial

statements, Balance Sheet, Profit and Loss Account, financial reports etc. of the

sample MFI’s.

d) SOURCES OF DATA:

Secondary source: Studies of overall composition of MFI’s are based on:-

i. Mixmarket website, Sa-Dhan website

ii. Annual reports of NABARD (National Bank for Agriculture and

Rural Development)

iii. Report on Status of microfinance in India from 2007-08 to 2012-13

published by NABARD.

iv. Magazines- Bank Quest, IIBF vision, Yojana etc.

7

v. Research papers related to microfinance and inclusive growth.

vi. Reference books related to MFI and inclusive growth.

vii. Newspaper articles.

e) RESEARCH VARIABLES AND ANALYSIS:

Research variables: Variables are the objects of the research that can be

measured. There are some variables which will be used for analysis to measure

financial performance and growth of MFI’s by the researcher. Those variables are

as follows:

01 Capital Asset Ratio (CA)

02 Debt to Equity Ratio (DE)

03 Gross Profit Margin (PM)

04 Number of active borrowers (NOAB)

05 Return on Asset Ratio (ROA)

06 Return on Equity Ratio (ROE)

07 Operating Expenses / Loan Portfolio Ratio (OELP)

Research variables are analyzed in order to accomplish the objectives of the

study. Various statistical tools are used to test the hypothesis framed. In order to

examine the contribution of MFI to Inclusive growth it will be seen that if the

ratios are significantly differs during the period of study that is 2008to 2012 then

it can be understood that MFI’s contribution is significant in Inclusive growth in

India. Since the ratios which are selected are indictor of financial viability and

shows the performance of MFI’s in India, therefore if these ratios are significantly

differ during the period of study it means they are financial viable and helps to

increase financial inclusion which is one of the factor for inclusive growth.

f) STATISTICAL TOOLS:

For the purpose of analysis, for various ratios mentioned below, average of five

years ratio i.e. 2008 to 2012 is found for each group separately. To examine

whether these ratios differ significantly between different years, One way

8

Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) is applied. In addition of this Krushkal- Wallies

test is also applied in order to overcome the precondition of normal distribution in

case of ANOVA.

6. SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY:

The present study is significant because of the following reasons:

1) This study and its outcomes will be a tool for the MFI’s.

a) To have a clear view about its current performance and risk (strength and

weaknesses).

b) To motivate the entire institutions towards performance improvement.

c) To follow up its development, assess progress in achieve sustainability.

d) To present itself to potential funders.

2) It might be a tool for investor:

a) To identify potential investment.

b) To follow up the MFI’s they are investing into.

3) It might be a tool for the government while framing regulation regarding operation of

MFI’s.

7. SCOPE OF THE STUDY

The scope of the present study is restricted to India. Under the present study few MFI’s

are considered for the accomplishment of research objectives. For the purpose to analyses

and examining financial performance and growth of MFI, selected variables are taken

into consideration.

8 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY:

Despite all sincere efforts in order to collect relevant information and data there will be some

limitations such as:

1. Due to limitation of time and money, study covers only 17 MFI in India.

9

2. The study reveals only financial performances of MFI and social performances of MFI’s

are excluded.

3. Under the study researcher has taken only 6 (six) of the ratios of sample MFI’s.

9. ANALYSIS

Inferential Analysis:

With a view to accomplish the stipulated set of hypothesis of the study parametric test ANOVA

and non parametric test Kruskal-Wallis Testis used. The ANOVA and Kruskal-Wallis tests do

not identify specific significant comparisons. The statistical tests indicate whether at least one

group mean is statistically significantly different from the mean for the other group(s). If the F-

value (or Chi-square) is significant, then we utilize statistical comparison tests to identify

individual significant differences. We test the differences among the five years (2008, 2009

2010, 2011 AND 2012) using ANOVA as well as Kruskal-Wallis tests. Both the tests applied for

each parameter separately. The results are presented in Tables 2 and 3.

Table 2

ANOVA Test Results

Capital

/asset

ratio

Debt to

equity

ratio

Number of

active

borrowers

Return

on

assets

Return

on

equity

Profit

margin

Operating

expense/ loan

portfolio

F-value 0.866 0.99 0.37 0.54 0.99 0.62 0.50

P –value 0.4879 0.4195 0.8903 0.7109 0.4213 0.6471 0.7353

Difference Insignif

icant

Insignifi

cant Insignificant

Insignifi

cant

Insignific

ant

Insignif

icant Insignificant

(Working note is given in appendix)

10

Table 3

Kruskal-Wallis Test Results

Capital

/asset

ratio

Debt to

equity

ratio

Number

of active

borrowers

Return

on

assets

Return

on

equity

Profit

margin

Operating

expense/ loan

portfolio

H 0.645 2.894 3.138 2.790 2.261 1.812 0.682

P -value 0.9580 0.5757 0.5350 0.5936 0.6879 0.7703 0.9535

Difference Insignif

icant

Insignific

ant

Insignifica

nt

Insignifi

cant

Insignif

icant

Insignif

icant Insignificant

(Working note is given in appendix)

10. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS:

In table 2 we report the ANOVA test result for each parameter. From the table 2 it is found that p

value for each parameter is greater than the level of significance at 0.05. This indicates that all

the selected ratios for this study differ insignificantly between various categories. Hence we

failed reject the null hypothesis for each parameter.

To overcome the assumption of normal distribution in case of ANOVA, Kruskal Wallis

test is also applied. In table 3 we report the Kruskal-Wallis test result for each parameter. It is

interesting to note that by applying both the techniques all ratios null hypothesis is accepted.

From the above discussion it follows that for different categories; there exists insignificant

difference in various ratios.

On the basis of the study, it can be concluded that there exists an insignificant difference

in the ratios of MFI’s when all categories are taken together; null hypothesis is accepted for all

the selected ratios indicating thereby that there does not exist a significant difference. We

conclude that group means are statistically insignificant. Hence there is no significance difference

between the mean values of ratios of MFI from the year 2008 to 2012 in India.

From this it follows that the ratios for all categories of MFI’s are generally indifferent

during the study period. On the basis of selected sample MFI’s and selected ratios, It is

concluded that contribution of MFI’s in Inclusive growth is not significant during the period

2008 to 2012

11

APPENDIX

1)

Capital/asset ratio

NAME OF THE MFI 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 AVERAGE

AROHAN FINANCE 0.2044 0.1293 0.266 0.2877 0.3922 0.25592

ASHIRWAD MICROFINANCE 0.3596 0.2406 0.2243 0.323 0.208 0.2711

BANDHAN 0.061 0.1045 0.1382 0.1651 0.1687 0.1275

BASIX 0.1136 0.1415 0.1344 -1.0369 0.0345 -0.12258

BWDA FINANCE LTD 0.1332 0.1348 0.1738 0.2632 0.2467 0.19034

EQUITAS MICROFINANCE 0.3613 0.3645 0.3166 0.252 0.1914 0.29716

IDF FINANCE 0.0963 0.2402 0.2148 0.2806 0.2734 0.22106 IMPACT WORLD VISION FINANCE 0.4225 0.4106 0.4409 0.4506 0.4058 0.42608

JANLAKSHMI FINANCE 0.1963 0.3948 0.2223 0.2285 0.1794 0.24426

MADURA MICROFINANCE 0.2836 0.2731 0.2728 0.3795 0.3358 0.30896

SAHARA UTSARG 0.1675 0.1296 0.1806 0.203 0.2922 0.19458

SAIIJA FINANCE 0.4241 0.501 0.2055 0.1169 0.8675 0.423

SONATA FINANCE 0.1991 0.4094 0.3319 0.3403 0.3121 0.31856

SURYODAY MICROFINANCE 0.9541 0.3186 0.4713 0.3866 0.3174 0.4896

SV CREDITLINE 0.803 0.7709 0.3026 0.3169 0.1696 0.4726

SWADHAR FINSERVE 0.8711 0.4237 0.3967 0.5066 0.3155 0.50272

UTKARSH MICROFINANCE 0.4553 0.6501 0.3897 0.3369 0.2465 0.4157

AVERAGE 0.359176 0.3316 0.2754353 0.223559 0.291571 0.29626824

2)

Debt to equity


AROHAN FINANCE 3.89 6.73 2.76 2.48 1.55 3.482


BANDHAN 15.39 8.57 6.24 5.06 4.93 8.038

BASIX 7.81 6.07 6.44 -1.96 28.02 9.276

BWDA FINANCE LTD 6.51 6.42 4.76 2.8 3.05 4.708


IDF FINANCE 9.38 3.16 3.66 2.56 2.66 4.284 IMPACT WORLD VISION FINANCE 1.37 - 1.27 1.22 1.46 1.33

JANLAKSHMI FINANCE 4.09 1.53 3.5 3.38 4.57 3.414


12

SAHARA UTSARG 4.97 6.71 4.54 3.93 2.42 4.514

SAIIJA FINANCE - 1 3.87 7.56 0.15 3.145

SONATA FINANCE 4.02 1.44 2.01 1.94 2.2 2.322

SURYODAY MICROFINANCE 0.05 2.14 1.12 1.59 2.15 1.41

SV CREDITLINE 0.25 0.3 2.3 2.16 4.9 1.982


UTKARSH MICROFINANCE 1.2 0.54 1.57 1.97 3.06 1.668

AVERAGE 4.0725 3.345625 3.167647 2.491765 4.312353 3.443353

3)

Number of active borrowers


AROHAN FINANCE 86237 187754 214059 107612 113665 141865.4

ASHIRWAD MICROFINANCE 48425 126483 219043 173109 113416 136095.2

BANDHAN 1454834 2301433 3254913 3617641 4433885 3012541

BASIX 498681 1114468 1526150 570520 377421 817448

BWDA FINANCE LTD 263968 220645 216655 152682 106696 192129.2

EQUITAS MICROFINANCE 339158 888600 1303339 1193247 1344361 1013741

IDF FINANCE 82416 129600 164235 143470 89430 121830.2 IMPACT WORLD VISION FINANCE 7021 8094 6654 6926 8863 7511.6

JANLAKSHMI FINANCE 43157 82161 193014 300847 695974 263030.6

MADURA MICROFINANCE 169700 250208 292634 212753 173029 219664.8

SAHARA UTSARG 84641 102094 134470 93318 67194 96343.4

SAIIJA FINANCE 382 7905 16270 5702 30489 12149.6

SONATA FINANCE 76632 85897 132328 132760 191675 123858.4

SURYODAY MICROFINANCE - 24678 87063 104571 156204 93129

SV CREDITLINE 0 9729 63062 80583 118217 54318.2

SWADHAR FINSERVE 8234 27391 56727 80201 96600 53830.6

UTKARSH MICROFINANCE - 10840 55506 106371 198181 92724.5

AVERAGE 210899.1 328116.5 466830.7 416606.6 489135.3 379541.8

4)

Return on assets


AROHAN FINANCE 0.0353 0.0202 0.0032 -0.1605 -0.0027 -0.0209


BANDHAN 0.0866 0.0352 0.0532 0.0644 0.0473 0.05734

13

BASIX 0.018 0.0312 0.0066 -0.6354 -0.352 -0.18632

BWDA FINANCE LTD 0.0103 0.0097 0.0112 0.006 -0.0575 -0.00406



JANLAKSHMI FINANCE - -0.0305 -0.0138 0.0046 0.0197 -0.005


SAHARA UTSARG - 0.0586 0.0506 0.0351 0.0275 0.04295

SAIIJA FINANCE - -0.1516 -0.0703 -0.1911 -0.0157 -0.10718

SONATA FINANCE 0.0736 0.0112 0.0494 0.0364 0.0161 0.03734

SURYODAY MICROFINANCE - -0.0539 0.0257 0.0071 0.015 -0.00153

SV CREDITLINE - -0.6068 -0.1404 0.0078 0.0086 -0.1827

SWADHAR FINSERVE -0.4491 -0.2075 -0.0589 0.0092 0.0115 -0.13896

UTKARSH MICROFINANCE - -0.1635 0.0163 0.0241 0.0218 -0.02533

AVERAGE -

0.00963 -

0.05283 0.004112 -

0.04125 -

0.00987 -0.02369

5)

Return on equity


AROHAN FINANCE 0.1493 0.1356 0.0163 -0.6512 -0.0062 -0.07124


BANDHAN 1.2562 0.3821 0.4112 0.3762 0.2608 0.5373

BASIX 0.1563 0.2329 0.0473 276.9735 0.2927 55.54054

BWDA FINANCE LTD 0.081 0.072 0.0745 0.0316 -0.1967 0.01248



JANLAKSHMI FINANCE - -0.0874 -0.0483 0.016 0.0864 -0.00833


SAHARA UTSARG - 0.411 0.3466 0.183 0.1154 0.264

SAIIJA FINANCE - -0.3089 -0.2301 -0.7098 -0.0167 -0.31638

SONATA FINANCE 0.3624 0.0328 0.1397 0.0983 0.042 0.13504

SURYODAY MICROFINANCE - -0.1436 0.0595 0.0164 0.0394 -0.00708

SV CREDITLINE - -0.7848 -0.3322 0.0211 0.0294 -0.26663


UTKARSH MICROFINANCE - -0.2576 0.0359 0.0506 0.076 -0.02378

AVERAGE 0.166982 0.007825 0.052859 16.27948 0.067694 3.29931

14

6)

Profit margin


AROHAN FINANCE 0.1692 0.1294 0.0176 -0.848 -0.0079 -0.10794


BANDHAN 0.4047 0.3683 0.3611 0.3853 0.3378 0.37144

BASIX 0.1237 0.2083 0.0413 -5.8387 -2.3271 -1.5585

BWDA FINANCE LTD 0.1471 0.1013 0.1155 0.0482 -0.4161 -0.0008



JANLAKSHMI FINANCE -0.4476 -0.1566 -0.0457 0.0172 0.1146 -0.10362


SAHARA UTSARG 0.3933 0.2631 0.2108 0.1366 0.1081 0.22238

SAIIJA FINANCE - -0.794 -0.2609 -1.044 -0.0748 -0.54343

SONATA FINANCE 0.3076 0.077 0.2762 0.22 0.1361 0.20338

SURYODAY MICROFINANCE -8.0627 -0.2338 0.08 0.0355 0.1062 -1.61496

SV CREDITLINE - 12.6247 -0.446 0.0265 0.0418 -3.2506


UTKARSH MICROFINANCE 0.2917 -2.0498 0.0568 0.167 0.1771 -0.27144

AVERAGE -

0.53233 -

0.91386 0.059747 -

0.35866 -

0.06842 -0.38301

7)

Operating expense/ loan portfolio


AROHAN FINANCE 0.1442 0.1225 0.1635 0.2266 0.1733 0.16602


BANDHAN 0.0878 0.0543 0.0612 0.0588 0.0447 0.06136

BASIX 0.1776 0.1588 0.1431 0.1762 0.2672 0.18458

BWDA FINANCE LTD 0.0598 0.0548 0.0541 0.0778 0.0909 0.06748



JANLAKSHMI FINANCE - 0.2467 0.2819 0.1897 0.1238 0.210525


SAHARA UTSARG

0.1165 0.1148 0.1473 0.1798 0.1396

15

SAIIJA FINANCE - 0.4318 0.3394 0.4453 0.2321 0.36215

SONATA FINANCE 0.1226 0.1568 0.1393 0.1293 0.1027 0.13014

SURYODAY MICROFINANCE - 0.3374 0.2527 0.1678 0.11 0.216975

SV CREDITLINE - 1.1543 0.3863 0.206 0.1116 0.46455


UTKARSH MICROFINANCE - 0.3762 0.259 0.1384 0.0999 0.218375

AVERAGE 0.199855 0.255075 0.176229 0.159618 0.128347 0.186959

8)

Capital/asset ratio

One factor ANOVA

Mean n Std. Dev YEAR

0.35918 17 0.275952 2008

0.33160 17 0.189963 2009

0.27544 17 0.103463 2010

0.22356 17 0.339244 2011

0.29157 17 0.174736 2012

0.29627 85 0.231019 Total

ANOVA table

Source SS df MS F

p-value

Treatment 0.186125 4 0.0465312 0.87 .4879

Error 4.296946 80 0.0537118 Total 4.483071 84

Kruskal-Wallis Test

Median N Avg. Rank YEAR

0.28 17 43.88 2008

0.32 17 46.24 2009

0.27 17 40.82 2010

0.29 17 43.65 2011

0.27 17 40.41 2012

0.28 85 Total

0.645 H

4 d.f.

16

.9580 p-value

9)

DEBT TO EQUITY RATIO

One factor ANOVA


4.253 15 4.1738 2008

3.502 15 2.6614 2009

3.247 15 1.6452 2010

2.239 15 1.5434 2011

4.780 15 6.5252 2012

3.604 75 3.7981 Total

ANOVA table

Source SS df MS F

p-value

Treatment 57.0824 4 14.27060 0.99 .4195

Error 1,010.3876 70 14.43411 Total 1,067.4700 74

Kruskal-Wallis Test

Median n

Avg. Rank YEAR

3.89 15 40.07 2008

2.66 15 37.23 2009

2.76 15 39.57 2010

2.16 15 30.23 2011

3.05 15 42.90 2012

2.66 75 Total

2.894

H (corrected for ties)

4 d.f.

.5757 p-value

17

10)

NUMBER OF ACTIVE BORROWERS

One factor ANOVA

Mean N Std. Dev YEAR

225,963.3 14 381,846.62 2008

395,195.2 14 641,302.60 2009

552,177.9 14 906,531.90 2010

485,056.3 14 952,599.88 2011

560,192.7 14 1,171,020.09 2012

443,717.1 70 839,463.95 Total

ANOVA table

Source SS df MS F

p-value

Treatment 1,075,344,835,073.63 4 268,836,208,768.407 0.37 .8309

Error 47,548,936,594,001.90 65 731,522,101,446.183 Total 48,624,281,429,075.50 69

Kruskal-Wallis Test

Median n Avg. Rank YEAR

83,528.50 14 27.93 2008

128,041.50 14 34.93 2009

203,536.50 14 41.14 2010

148,076.00 14 37.07 2011

113,540.50 14 36.43 2012

133,615.00 70 Total

3.138 H

4 d.f.

.5350 p-value

11)

RETURN ON ASSETS

One factor ANOVA

18


-0.01403 10 0.155451 2008

0.01025 10 0.078982 2009

0.01917 10 0.033841 2010

-0.05912 10 0.211552 2011

-0.02577 10 0.117841 2012

-0.01390 50 0.131733 Total

ANOVA table

Source SS df MS F

p-value

Treatment 0.038626 4 0.0096565 0.54 .7104

Error 0.811704 45 0.0180379 Total 0.850330 49

Kruskal-Wallis Test


0.02 10 27.70 2008

0.03 10 30.35 2009

0.02 10 26.15 2010

0.01 10 22.30 2011

0.01 10 21.00 2012

0.02 50 Total

2.790


4 d.f.

.5936 p-value

12)

OPERATING EXPENSE/ LOAN PORTFOLIO

One factor ANOVA


0.21441 10 0.336130 2008

0.14183 10 0.152066 2009

0.12518 10 0.095217 2010

19

0.12710 10 0.064535 2011

0.12031 10 0.064350 2012

0.14577 50 0.171595 Total

ANOVA table

Source SS

df MS F p-

value

Treatment 0.061477 4 0.0153693 0.50 .7353

Error 1.381318 45 0.0306960 Total 1.442795 49

Kruskal-Wallis Test


0.12 10 27.40 2008

0.10 10 22.80 2009

0.11 10 24.50 2010

0.12 10 27.10 2011

0.10 10 25.70 2012

0.11 50 Total

0.682 H

4 d.f.

.9535 p-value

13)

RETURN ON EQUITY

One factor ANOVA

Mean N Std. Dev YEAR

0.17478 10 0.458017 2008

0.12965 10 0.209951 2009

0.10435 10 0.138115 2010

27.71684 10 87.580248 2011

0.07910 10 0.138799 2012

5.64094 50 39.156200 Total

ANOVA table

20

Source SS Df MS F p-

value

Treatment 6,091.864764 4 1,522.9661911 0.99 .4213

Error 69,035.328972 45 1,534.1184216 Total 75,127.193736 49

Kruskal-Wallis Test

Median N Avg. Rank YEAR

0.13 10 27.60 2008

0.15 10 30.45 2009

0.09 10 24.20 2010

0.07 10 23.30 2011

0.06 10 21.95 2012

0.10 50 Total

2.261


4 d.f.

.6879 p-value

14)

PROFIT MARGIN

One factor ANOVA


-0.58741 14 2.252808 2008

-0.08594 14 0.670818 2009

0.11954 14 0.169385 2010

-0.36363 14 1.600852 2011

-0.08501 14 0.665959 2012

-0.20049 70 1.294098 Total

ANOVA table

Source SS df MS F

p-value

Treatment 4.272787 4 1.0681968 0.62 .6471

Error 111.280743 65 1.7120114 Total 115.553530 69

21

Kruskal-Wallis Test


0.16 14 39.86 2008

0.17 14 37.93 2009

0.10 14 36.18 2010

0.07 14 31.32 2011

0.11 14 32.21 2012

0.12 70 Total

1.812


4 d.f.

.7703 p-value

22

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1) B. Sujatha, Microfinance: Providing Access to Financial Services in Rural India (Vipin

Sharma), Financial Inclusion- Concepts, The ICFAI University Press, Hyderabad (2007).

Pp.85-92

2) Katuri Nageshwar Rao, “ Microfinance Institutions- Delivery Model ( P.Dinakara Rao

and Swapana Chimanchodkar)”, “Some Radical Thoughts on Microfinance (S N

Ghosal)”, “ Indian Commercial Banking – The New dynamics”, The ICFAI University

Press (Hyderabad) 2007, pp.91-99, 107-113.

3) Katuri Nageshwar Rao, “ Rural Credit and Microfinance”, The ICFAI University Press,

(Hyderarbad), 2006.

4) Dr. Y.V Reddy, Governor, RBI at the micro finance conference organized by Indian

School of Business, Hyderabad on August 6, 2005.

5) Economic growth, financial deepening and financial inclusion, Dr. Rakesh Mohan at the

Annual Bankers' Conference 2006, at Hyderabad on Nov 3, 2006.

6) Jagdish kapoor, Deputy Governor, RBI at the Asia Pacific Region Micro Credit Summit

Meeting of Councils at New Delhi on Feb 03,2001, Developmental issues in Micro

credit.

7) Jonathan Morduch, “ Analysis of the Effects of Microfinance on Poverty Reduction”,

Robert F. Wagner Graduate School of Public Service,New York University,4

Washington Square North,New York, NY 10003.

8) Basu, P. & Srivastava, P. (2005) Scaling up Microfinance for India’s Rural poor, World

Bank Policy research working paper 3646 (http://econ.worldbank.org).

9) Deubel, T.F. “Banking on Culture” Microcredit as incentive for cultural conservation in

Mali, In Fernado, J.L. (ed.) Microfinance Perils and Prospects, 2006, Routledge, Oxon

10) Buckley, G. (1997) “Microfinance in Africa: Is it Either the problem or the solution?”

World Development 25 (7):1081-93

11) Weiss, J., & Montgomery, H. (2004) “Great Expectations : Microfinance and Poverty

reduction.

12) Dichter, T. (2006) Hype and Hope: The worrisome state of the Microcredit movement,

http://econ.worldbank.org/

23

The South African Institute of International Affairs (www.saiia.org.za/.

13) Greeley, M. (2005) Microfinance impact and the MDGs:Why we need Social

Performance Management, paper for the Microfinance India conference, April 12-14,

2005, New Delhi.

14) Robinson, M. (2001) The Microfinance Revolution, Sustainable Finance for the Poor,

The World bank, Washington, DC.

15) Zeller, M., & Meyer, R.L. “Improving the performance of Microfinance :Financial

Sustainability, Outreach and Impact”.

16) Buckley, G. (1997) “Microfinance in Africa: Is it Either the problem or the solution?”

World Development 25 (7):1081-93.

17) National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development (NABARD) Burgess, R. & Pande,

R.(2005) Do Rural banks matter? Evidence from the Indian social banking experiment,

American Economic Review, Vol 95 (3).

18) ADB (2004) ADB Annual Report 2004, Special Theme: The Changing face of the

microfinance industry, Manila. Countdown (2005), Volume 1, Issue 4: May/June 1998,

Microcredit Summit Campaign, Washington, D.

19) Seibel, Hans D. (October 2005), “Does history matter? The old and new World of

Microfinance in Europe and Asia”, Paper presented at: From Moneylenders to

Microfinance: Southeast Asia's credit revolution in institutional, economic and cultural

perspective, An interdisciplinary workshop, Asia Research Institute, Department of

Economics and Department of Sociology, National University of Singapore.

20) Seibel, H.D. & Parhusip, U (1990) Financial Innovations for microenterprises – linking

formaland informal institutions. In Harper, M. (Ed.) (2003) Microfinance : Evolution,

Achievement and Challenges, ITDG Publishing, London.

21) Remenyi, J. “Is there a ‘State of the Art’ in Microfinance”. In Remenyi, J., & Quinones,

B. (Ed.) (2000) Microfinance and Poverty Alleviation Case Studies from Asia & the

Pacific, Pinter, London,CGAP (2003), Focus Note No.24, Washington, DC.

http://www.saiia.org.za/

research paper on contribution of microfinance toward inclusive growth

Documents

financial system

delivery of financial

financial services players

financial performances

inclusive growth paper

productivity growth

microfinance institutions

research paper