Smallholder farmers have long been denied access to formal credit, largely because of the high administrative fees associated with loans. A possible solution to this problem, which has become increasingly popular, is the use of microcredit financing, where innovative means of securing the loans, such as peer monitoring, are used. This paper examines the effectiveness of formal microcredit schemes as compared to the traditional informal credit sources in a rural shrimp farming district of Bangladesh. We compare the two types of credit by studying the technical and allocative efficiencies of the two groups of borrowers. The findings suggest that farmers using both types of microcredit have difficulty accessing credit, often over-utilising labour in order to reduce the need for inputs that require cash at the beginning of the season, creating inefficiencies in production. However, the informal lenders, with their closer ties to individual farmers, were more successful in identifying those small-holders most likely to make the best use of the borrowed funds. Thus, although formal microcredit schemes do not impose the high administrative fees of traditional formal lending, they do not necessarily solve the problem of how to select successful borrowers.
Download Info
To download:
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the
proper application to
view it first. Information about this may be contained
in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read
the IDEAS help
page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS
site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Publisher Info
Paper provided by International Institute for Environment and Development, Environmental Economics Programme in its series Discussion Papers with number
37921.
References listed on IDEAS Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.: