Definition of Microfinance

Microfinance has evolved as an economic development approach intended to

benefit low-income women and men. The term refers to the provision of
financial services to low-income clients, including the self-employed. Financial
services generally include savings and credit; however, some microfinance
organizations also provide insurance and payment services. In addition to
financial intermediation, many MFIs provide social intermediation services
such as group formation, development of self- confidence, and training in
financial literacy and management capabilities among members of a group.

Thus, the definition of microfinance often includes both financial intermediation

and social intermediation.

Microfinance is the provision of a broad range of financial services such as

deposits, loans, payment services, money transfers and insurance products to the
poor and low-income households, for their microenterprises and small
businesses, to enable them to raise their income levels and improve their living
standards.

Microfinance activities usually involve:

a) Small loans, typically for working capital;

b) Informal appraisal of borrowers and investments;

c) Collateral substitutes, such as group guarantees or compulsory savings;

d) Access to repeat and larger loans, based on repayment performance;

e) Streamlined loan disbursement and monitoring; and

f) Secure savings products.

Although some MFIs provide enterprise development services, such as skills

training and marketing, and social services, such as literacy training and health
care, these are not generally included in the definition of microfinance.
(However, enterprise development services and social services are some of the
services that MFIs are currently providing).

MFIs can be nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), savings and loan

cooperatives, credit unions, government banks, commercial banks, or nonbank
financial institutions. Microfinance clients are typically self-employed, low-
income entrepreneurs in both urban and rural areas. Clients are often traders,
street vendors, small farmers, service providers (hairdressers, rickshaw drivers),
and artisans and small producers, such as black- smiths and seamstresses.
Usually their activities provide a stable source of income (often from more than

1
one activity). Although they are poor, they are generally not considered to be
the “poorest of the poor.”

Moneylenders, pawnbrokers, and rotating savings and credit associations are

informal microfinance providers and important sources of financial
intermediation.

MICROCREDIT AND MICROFINANCE

The terms, microcredit and microfinance, are often used synonymously in the
current development discourse (Morduch, 1999; Ledgerwood, 1999).
Microcredit programs, which critically depend on private and public financial
assistance, are supposed to be run by non-profit organizations. On the contrary,
the microfinance programs are profit-making financial ventures that are meant
to be self-financed eventually. Thus, although the operational principles and
policies of these small-loan programs are similar, they are fundamentally
different with respect to their motives and means of operation. Naturally,
confusions are created when these two small-loan programs are treated as
synonymous.

Functional and Conceptual Difference of Microcredit and Microfinance

Experimentation with the microcredit idea began in different parts of the TW

during the first half of the 1970's. However, the chronology of events shows
that the idea became popular after the currently famous Grameen Bank was
founded in Bangladesh in the early 1980's. In general, microcredit programs
have five key principles that distinguish them from conventional financial
institutions (Grameen Bank, 2005a).

1) First, the loan size is small, averaging about US $100;

2) Second, the primary customers of these loans are the rural poor, women
in particular, who have little access to conventional banking facilities;
3) Third, the purpose of these loans is to create income-generating activities
in the rural non-formal sectors through self-employment;
4) Fourth, these loans are collateral-free; and
5) Finally, the micro lenders have integrated the credit and savings
mobilization functions. Unlike the conventional banks, regular savings
are a pre-condition for getting loans from the micro financial enterprises.

These features are not supposed to be similar across the microcredit programs,
meaning that the operational principles of different microcredit programs might
vary slightly.

There are, however, several features of the current microcredit movement that
make them decidedly different from the traditional informal credit agencies.

2
 1) First, the microcredit movement is an NGO approach to poverty-
alleviation. The current NGOs have their origin in the non-profit value-
based voluntary organizations, which have been working throughout the
world, particularly in the West, for centuries (Hall, 1987; Korten, 1987).
This means that, like the traditional informal credit agencies, the NGOs
do not have the profit motives;
2) Second, there are charity organizations, which also help the poor with
small loans under the assumption that their poverty was due to 'personal
failings' (Robson, 1997). The current NGO approach is different from the
personal failing theory in that it believes poverty is created through social
processes by depriving the poor from their rightful access to social
resources. One of these social resources is credit, which the microcredit
leaders treat as a kind of human right; and
3) Finally, the microcredit leaders believe that they can inspire social and
economic revolutions in the less developing countries through organizing
the poor under the banner of the Grameen type microcredit organizations.

Microfinance is defined as a development approach that provides financial as

well as social intermediation (Ledgerwood, 1999; Robinson, 2002). The
financial intermediation includes the provision of savings, credit and insurance
services, while social intermediation involves organizing citizens' groups to
voice their aspirations and concerns for consideration by policy makers,
development of self-confidence etc. These services are provided by three types
of lender:

1) Formal institutions, such as rural banks and cooperatives;

2) Semiformal institutions, such as nongovernmental organizations; and
3) Informal sources such as moneylenders and shopkeepers.

Institutional microfinance includes microfinance services provided by both

formal and semiformal institutions called Microfinance Institutions.

Functional Difference of Microcredit and Microfinance

The basic functional difference between microcredit and microfinance programs

concerns the type of services provided. Microcredit programs, such as Grameen
Bank, provide mainly one kind of service-loan distribution and recovery that are
inseparably attached with group formation and compulsory savings
mobilization.

Microfinance programs, on the other hand, provide all kinds of financial

service, including microcredit. Thus, microcredit is just one, albeit the most
important, element of the microfinance.

Thus, from the functional point of view, the difference between microcredit and
microfinance ideas seems quite clear. Their historical developments suggest that

3
microfinance revolution is a transformation of the microcredit revolution that
started in the mid 1970's. This is perhaps the reason the two ideas are often used
synonymously; or the two programs are examined under the same heading
(Morduck, 1999; Ledgerwood, 1999).

Conceptual Difference of Microcredit and Microfinance

Banking, defined as financial intermediation, involves bringing together `the

independent acts of savers and borrowers to facilitate one another's goals'.
Microfinance is no different from this traditional banking concept except that
the market for microfinance consists primarily of poor people in rural areas of
developing countries who need credit for pursuing small enterprises in the
informal sector. The microfinance entrepreneurs are usual business people, who
meet this demand with normal profit motive. This also means that they are
supposed to be self-financed eventually.

Thus, there are two fundamental conceptual differences between microcredit

and microfinance ideas.

1) The first is profit-motive. By definition, microcredit programs are NGOs,

meaning that they cannot run their operations with the objective of
making profits. The microfinance, on the other hand, is a profit-making
private venture.
2) The second fundamental conceptual difference concerns the means of
financing micro lending operations. Microcredit programs, being non-
profit organizations, depend upon external finance, but microfinance
programs must eventually become self-financed, because they are profit-
making ventures. For example, moneylenders use their own money to do
their business; they do not approach either national or international donor
agencies for investment funds.

PRINCIPLES OF MICROFINANCE

1) The poor need a variety of financial services, not just loans. Just
like everyone else, poor people need a wide range of financial services
that are convenient, flexible, and reasonably priced. Depending on
their circumstances, poor people need not only credit, but also savings,
cash transfers, and insurance;
2) Microfinance is a powerful instrument against poverty. Access to
sustainable financial services enables the poor to increase incomes,
build assets, and reduce their vulnerability to external shocks.
Microfinance allows poor households to move from everyday survival
to planning for the future, investing in better nutrition, improved
living conditions, and children’s health and education;
3) Microfinance means building financial systems that serve the
poor. Poor people constitute the vast majority of the population in

4
 most developing countries. Yet, an overwhelming number of the poor
continue to lack access to basic financial services. In many countries,
microfinance continues to be seen as a marginal sector and primarily a
development concern for donors, governments, and socially-
responsible investors. In order to achieve its full potential of reaching
a large number of the poor, microfinance should become an integral
part of the financial sector;
4) Financial sustainability is necessary to reach significant numbers
of poor people. Most poor people are not able to access financial
services because of the lack of strong retail financial intermediaries.
Building financially sustainable institutions is not an end in itself. It is
the only way to reach significant scale and impact far beyond what
donor agencies can fund. Sustainability is the ability of a microfinance
provider to cover all of its costs. It allows the continued operation of
the microfinance provider and the ongoing provision of financial
services to the poor. Achieving financial sustainability means reducing
transaction costs, offering better products and services that meet client
needs, and finding new ways to reach the unbanked poor;
5) Microfinance is about building permanent local financial
institutions. Building financial systems for the poor means building
sound domestic financial intermediaries that can provide financial
services to poor people on a permanent basis. Such institutions should
be able to mobilize and recycle domestic savings, extend credit, and
provide a range of services. Dependence on funding from donors and
governments including government-financed development banks will
gradually diminish as local financial institutions and private capital
markets mature;
6) Microcredit is not always the answer. Microcredit is not appropriate
for everyone or every situation. The destitute and hungry who have no
income or means of repayment need other forms of support before
they can make use of loans. In many cases, small grants, infrastructure
improvements, employment and training programs, and other non-
financial services may be more appropriate tools for poverty
alleviation. Wherever possible, such non-financial services should be
coupled with building savings;
7) Interest rate ceilings can damage poor people’s access to financial
services. It costs much more to make many small loans than a few
large loans. Unless microlenders can charge interest rates that are well
above average bank loan rates, they cannot cover their costs, and their
growth and sustainability will be limited by the scarce and uncertain
supply of subsidized funding. When governments regulate interest
rates, they usually set them at levels too low to permit sustainable
microcredit. At the same time, microlenders should not pass on
operational inefficiencies to clients in the form of prices (interest rates
and other fees) that are far higher than they need to be;

5
 8) The government’s role is as an enabler, not as a direct provider of
financial services. National governments play an important role in
setting a supportive policy environment that stimulates the
development of financial services while protecting poor people’s
savings. The key things that a government can do for microfinance are
to maintain macroeconomic stability, avoid interest-rate caps, and
refrain from distorting the market with unsustainable subsidized, high-
delinquency loan programs. Governments can also support financial
services for the poor by improving the business environment for
entrepreneurs, clamping down on corruption, and improving access to
markets and infrastructure. In special situations, government funding
for sound and independent microfinance institutions may be warranted
when other funds are lacking;
9) Donor subsidies should complement, not compete with private
sector capital. Donors should use appropriate grant, loan, and equity
instruments on a temporary basis to build the institutional capacity of
financial providers, develop supporting infrastructure (like rating
agencies, credit bureaus, audit capacity, etc.), and support
experimental services and products. In some cases, longer-term donor
subsidies may be required to reach sparsely populated and otherwise
difficult-to-reach populations. To be effective, donor funding must
seek to integrate financial services for the poor into local financial
markets; apply specialist expertise to the design and implementation
of projects; require that financial institutions and other partners meet
minimum performance standards as a condition for continued support;
and plan for exit from the outset;
10) The lack of institutional and human capacity is the key
constraint. Microfinance is a specialized field that combines banking
with social goals, and capacity needs to be built at all levels, from
financial institutions through the regulatory and supervisory bodies
and information systems, to government development entities and
donor agencies. Most investments in the sector, both public and
private, should focus on this capacity building; and
11) The importance of financial and outreach transparency.
Accurate, standardized, and comparable information on the financial
and social performance of financial institutions providing services to
the poor is imperative. Bank supervisors and regulators, donors,
investors, and more importantly, the poor who are clients of
microfinance need this information to adequately assess risk and
returns.

THE PRINCIPLES OF CLIENT PROTECTION IN MICROFINANCE

The Client Protection Principles describe the minimum protection microfinance

clients should expect from providers. These Principles are distilled from the
path-breaking work of providers, international networks, and national

6
microfinance associations to develop pro-consumer codes of conduct and
practices. While the Principles are universal, meaningful and effective
implementation will require careful attention to the diversity within the provider
community and conditions in different markets and country contexts. Over the
past several years, consensus has emerged that providers of financial services to
low-income clients should adhere to the following six core principles:

1) Avoidance of Over-Indebtedness. Providers will take reasonable

steps to ensure that credit will be extended only if borrowers have
demonstrated an adequate ability to repay and loans will not put
borrowers at significant risk of over-indebtedness. Similarly, providers
will take adequate care that noncredit, financial products (such as
insurance) extended to low-income clients are appropriate.
2) Transparent Pricing. The pricing, terms, and conditions of financial
products (including interest charges, insurance premiums, all fees,
etc.) will be transparent and will be adequately disclosed in a form
understandable to clients.
3) Appropriate Collections Practices. Debt collection practices of
providers will not be abusive or coercive.
4) Ethical Staff Behavior. Staff of financial service providers will
comply with high ethical standards in their interaction with
microfinance clients and such providers will ensure that adequate
safeguards are in place to detect and correct corruption or
mistreatment of clients.
5) Mechanisms for Redress of Grievances. Providers will have in place
timely and responsive mechanisms for complaints and problem
resolution for their clients.
6) Privacy of Client Data. The privacy of individual client data will be
respected, and such data cannot be used for other purposes without the
express permission of the client (while recognizing that providers of
financial services can play an important role in helping clients achieve
the benefits of establishing credit histories).