IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ecl/wisagr/437.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Enhancing Rural Women's Access to Capital: Why It Is Important and How It Can Be Done. The Case of Colombia

Author

Listed:
  • Fletschner, Diana

    (U of Wisconsin)

Abstract

Improving access to capital for low wealth households is a vital part of any rural development strategy, especially one designed to rectify long standing rural inequality and to generate broadly-based growth. In addition, there may be further benefits from specifically targeting the capital needs of rural and low-income women. Most credit programs oriented to increase access to credit for poor households are based on a "gender neutral" approach. However, unless specifically targeted, women tend to have inferior access to financial resources than do men. This differential deserves special consideration from policy makers given presumed social welfare and productivity gains to be had from specifically enhancing women's productive capacity within the household. This paper introduces the rationale for enhancing women's access to capital, documents the particular factors that constrain women's credit access from conventional financial intermediaries, and presents a review of the international experience with women-targeted credit programs. Finally, it reviews the position of rural women in Colombia with an emphasis on the position of women within the Colombian financial sector.

Suggested Citation

  • Fletschner, Diana, 2000. "Enhancing Rural Women's Access to Capital: Why It Is Important and How It Can Be Done. The Case of Colombia," Staff Paper Series 437, University of Wisconsin, Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:ecl:wisagr:437
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.aae.wisc.edu/pubs/sps/pdf/stpap437.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. John C. Harsanyi & Reinhard Selten, 1988. "A General Theory of Equilibrium Selection in Games," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262582384, December.
    2. Cheryl Doss & Ben Senauer, 1994. "Strengthening Agricultural and Natural Resource Policy through Intrahousehold Analysis: Discussion," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 76(5), pages 1226-1228.
    3. Haddad, Lawrence & Hoddinott, John & Alderman, Harold & DEC, 1994. "Intrahousehold resource allocation : an overview," Policy Research Working Paper Series 1255, The World Bank.
    4. Gary S. Becker, 1981. "A Treatise on the Family," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number beck81-1, March.
    5. Pitt, M.M. & Khandker, S.R., 1996. "Household and Intrahousehold Impact of the Grameen Bank and Similar Targeted Credit Programs in Bangladesh," World Bank - Discussion Papers 320, World Bank.
    6. Udry, Christopher, 1996. "Gender, Agricultural Production, and the Theory of the Household," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 104(5), pages 1010-1046, October.
    7. Doss, Cheryl R., 1994. "Models Of Intrahousehold Resource Allocation: Assumptions And Empirical Tests," Staff Papers 14196, University of Minnesota, Department of Applied Economics.
    8. Lundberg, Shelly & Pollak, Robert A, 1993. "Separate Spheres Bargaining and the Marriage Market," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 101(6), pages 988-1010, December.
    9. Bruce, Judith, 1989. "Homes divided," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 17(7), pages 979-991, July.
    10. Baydas, Mayada M. & Meyer, Richard L. & Aguilera-Alfred, Nelson, 1994. "Discrimination against women in formal credit markets: Reality or rhetoric?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 22(7), pages 1073-1082, July.
    11. Elizabeth Katz, 1997. "The Intra-Household Economics of Voice and Exit," Feminist Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(3), pages 25-46.
    12. Pollak, Robert A, 1985. "A Transaction Cost Approach to Families and Households," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 23(2), pages 581-608, June.
    13. Christine Jones, 1983. "The Mobilization of Women's Labor for Cash Crop Production: A Game Theoretic Approach," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 65(5), pages 1049-1054.
    14. Marjorie B. McElroy, 1990. "The Empirical Content of Nash-Bargained Household Behavior," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 25(4), pages 559-583.
    15. Chiappori, Pierre-Andre, 1988. "Rational Household Labor Supply," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 56(1), pages 63-90, January.
    16. Chen, Zhiqi & Woolley, Frances, 2001. "A Cournot-Nash Model of Family Decision Making," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 111(474), pages 722-748, October.
    17. Hashemi, Syed M. & Schuler, Sidney Ruth & Riley, Ann P., 1996. "Rural credit programs and women's empowerment in Bangladesh," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 24(4), pages 635-653, April.
    18. Kanbur, R., 1991. "Linear Expenditure Systems, Children as Public Goods and Intra-Household Inequality," Papers 104, Warwick - Development Economics Research Centre.
    19. Folbre, Nancy, 1986. "Hearts and spades: Paradigms of household economics," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 14(2), pages 245-255, February.
    20. Folbre, Nancy, 1984. "Household Production in the Philippines: A Non-neoclassical Approach," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 32(2), pages 303-330, January.
    21. Razavi, Shahra, 1997. "Fitting gender into development institutions," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 25(7), pages 1111-1125, July.
    22. McElroy, Marjorie B & Horney, Mary Jean, 1981. "Nash-Bargained Household Decisions: Toward a Generalization of the Theory of Demand," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 22(2), pages 333-349, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Fletschner, Diana K., 2000. "Enhancing Rural Women'S Access To Capital: Why It Is Important And How It Can Be Done. The Case Of Colombia," Staff Papers 12640, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    2. Xu, Zeyu, 2007. "A survey on intra-household models and evidence," MPRA Paper 3763, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Smith, Lisa C. & Chavas, Jean-Paul, 1999. "Supply response of West African agricultural households," FCND discussion papers 69, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    4. Fafchamps, Marcel, 1998. "Efficiency in intrahousehold resource allocation," FCND discussion papers 55, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    5. Agarwal, Bina, 1997. ""Bargaining" and gender relations," FCND discussion papers 27, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    6. Alderman, Harold & Hoddinott, John & Haddad, Lawrence James & Udry, Christopher, 1995. "Gender differentials in farm productivity," FCND discussion papers 6, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    7. Malapit, Hazel Jean L., 2012. "Why do spouses hide income?," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 41(5), pages 584-593.
    8. Chiappori, Pierre-André & Donni, Olivier, 2009. "Non-unitary Models of Household Behavior: A Survey of the Literature," IZA Discussion Papers 4603, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    9. Doss, Cheryl R., 1996. "Testing among models of intrahousehold resource allocation," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 24(10), pages 1597-1609, October.
    10. Udry, Christopher & Hoddinott, John & Alderman, Harold & Haddad, Lawrence, 1995. "Gender differentials in farm productivity: implications for household efficiency and agricultural policy," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(5), pages 407-423, October.
    11. Del Boca, Daniela & Flinn, Christopher, 2012. "Endogenous household interaction," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 166(1), pages 49-65.
    12. Laurens CHERCHYE & Thomas DEMUYNCK & Bram DE ROCK, 2010. "Noncooperative household consumption with caring," Working Papers of Department of Economics, Leuven ces10.34, KU Leuven, Faculty of Economics and Business (FEB), Department of Economics, Leuven.
    13. Katharina Mader & Alyssa Schneebaum, 2013. "Zur geschlechtsspezifischen Intrahaushaltsverteilung von Entscheidungsmacht in Europa," Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft - WuG, Kammer für Arbeiter und Angestellte für Wien, Abteilung Wirtschaftswissenschaft und Statistik, vol. 39(3), pages 361-403.
    14. Anyck Dauphin & Bernard Fortin & Guy Lacroix, 2018. "Is consumption efficiency within households falsifiable?," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 16(3), pages 737-766, September.
    15. Doss, Cheryl R., 1994. "Models Of Intrahousehold Resource Allocation: Assumptions And Empirical Tests," Staff Papers 14196, University of Minnesota, Department of Applied Economics.
    16. Schneebaum, Alyssa & Mader, Katharina, 2013. "The gendered nature of intra-household decision making in and across Europe," Department of Economics Working Paper Series 157, WU Vienna University of Economics and Business.
    17. Olivier Bargain & Nicolas Moreau, 2013. "The Impact of Tax-Benefit Reforms on Labor Supply in a Simulated Nash-bargaining Framework," Journal of Family and Economic Issues, Springer, vol. 34(1), pages 77-86, March.
    18. Arthur-Holmes, Francis & Abrefa Busia, Kwaku, 2020. "Household dynamics and the bargaining power of women in artisanal and small-scale mining in sub-Saharan Africa: A Ghanaian case study," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    19. Catherine Sofer & Claire Thibout, 2011. "Stereotypes upon abilities in domestic production and household behaviour," Post-Print halshs-00654232, HAL.
    20. Robert Pollak, 2003. "Gary Becker's Contributions to Family and Household Economics," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 111-141, January.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ecl:wisagr:437. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/dauwius.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.