Comments on: How microfinance can work A slice of lime in the soda Sun, 26 Oct 2014 19:05:02 +0000 hourly 1 By: bobdillman Mon, 21 Feb 2011 07:14:13 +0000 This is an interesting post but it leaves out one crucial element. It is stated “All borrowers have to pay back more money than they borrowed, which means that they come out behind on the deal — unless they can put the money to good productive use.”

The key aspect most people (and funds) miss, is that microfinance is woefully under-represented in the area of avoided costs, mainly energy. When microfinance is used in a pointed manner to attack potentially avoided costs (firewood use, time to gather wood or water when appropriate), the interest expense and transaction costs are not as comparatively heavy and in most cases, both the borrower and mother nature benefits. That is especially true if the avoided cost can be permanently eliminated.

Funds, online lenders like Kiva, generally miss this point as they assume all microloans go to entrepreneurs. Not true. Infrastructure finance that eliminates avoided costs and matches the payments with the avoided costs is the holy grail of microfinance. People are slowly getting it.

By: peoplecentred Fri, 18 Feb 2011 21:53:21 +0000 The case for a social business approach from a practitioner

“Limiting the financial return of a social business to return on investment (ROI) can help balance the company’s blended focus on profit and mission, says Terry Hallman, CEO of a U.K.-based social business addressing poverty relief and reformed childcare in the former Soviet Union.”

In an earlier interview he describes a success in Siberia icdev.html

By: philanthropoid Fri, 18 Feb 2011 15:52:01 +0000 why not go the route of savings (demand side) instead of credit. that’s what Gates is doing. there are successful models, such as Kenya’s Mpesa. tech rails just need to be in place.

By: bxg12 Fri, 18 Feb 2011 01:06:44 +0000 > catalyst for women outside the labor market, turning them into economically productive individuals.

Can you explain? I know what a productive individual is, but to be moreover economically so – WTF? Or is there a missing hyphen – do you mean “economically-productive individual”? I hope not since this would be insidious, near evil, to suggest that if there isn’t a cash wage attached then valuable work isn’t “economically productive”. Or on the third hand, maybe you are using one of those two words in a non-standard sense -?

By: DavidRoodman Thu, 17 Feb 2011 20:48:03 +0000 “My core argument is and has been that for-profit microlenders who don’t take deposits can be bad for the borrowers and also pose a significant systemic risk.”


And, I should add, it’s much easier in blogging than in debating on video to work in all the nuances, so we should all put more weight on what you write than what you say. Heaven help me if someone starts doing close analysis of my video utterances. At least you speak in complete sentences!