IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/sol/wpaper/08-001.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Empowering women via microfinance in fragile states

Author

Listed:
  • Beatriz Armendariz
  • Nigel Roome

Abstract

Ever since microfinance was popularized in the mid-1970s in Bangladesh one of its salient features has been the overwhelming representation of women, mostly in fragile states. Institutional structures and social norms in such states are very rigid. Nevertheless, the trend has increased steadily, particularly during the 1980s. According to 2006 Microcredit Summit Campaign Report, seven out of ten microfinance clients are women. Millions of these women are married or live with a partner, and many have children. Relative to initial lending practices by the Grameen Bank in Bangladesh, the bias in favor of loans to women in microfinance has been accompanied by an increasing trend to exclude men from microfinance services, particularly in the context of loans to those with very low income levels. The practice of exclusion might however prove to be counterproductive for it can generate frictions within households, as men feel increasingly threatened in their role as primary breadwinners within the household. In this essay we argue that the promotion of women in microfinance initiatives and the bias against men is taking place in the absence of solid empirical evidence on the effects of this approach on the balance of power in households and on the health, education and well-being of all household members. We hold to these to be key aspects of development. We further argue that this issue deserves research attention given the possibility of unforeseen outcomes and adverse consequences that run counter to the goal to encourage microfinance initiatives as a means to promote development. To clarify the central issues, on the one hand, higher household income in the hands of women might increase health and education for women and their household members –we call this the women-empowerment effect. On the other hand, the exclusion of men from access to subsidized finance might create frictions, and rebound effects that diminish the supportive role women play for their spouses and wider household members in the production of health and education – we call this the women-disempowering effect. In the event that the latter effect dominates over the former, then subsidized microfinance for women might have no overall positive impact, or even worse, a negative impact on health and education at the household level and the women in households. An even more challenging issue is to better understand what influence social and institutional conditions exercise on the empowerment and disempowerment effects experienced by women in microfinance initiatives and the subsequent outcomes in terms of development. This issue matters because microfinance initiatives are specifically directed at household level, and, yet prevailing social and institutional norms are determined at community or societal level. In the circumstances where social and institutional conditions dominate the effects of microfinance initiatives it would imply that microfinance projects might lead to better outcomes when they are accompanied by measures for institutional capacity building that promote the rights and role of women in society. This essay is structured as follows. First, it provides an overview of what we currently know about microfinance, gender, health and education in the context of Bangladesh, where most research has been conducted. Second, some anecdotal evidence from Bangladesh and Africa on the notion of microfinance empowerment is presented and discussed. This raises questions about the influence of institutional structures and norms on the enhanced capacity of women to assert their role as the main providers of health and education, mainly arising from the fact that the empowerment of women generates frictions with their partners, which in turn leads to a potential disempowerment effects. It also suggests that institutional structures and norms serve to constrain the outcomes of microfinance initiatives. Third, anecdotal evidence from Chiapas, in southern Mexico, is outlined which provided the basis for empirical research on new approaches to microfinance now being undertaken in the region. Fourth, the essay outlines this experimental intervention in southern Mexico, where the women borrowers in a microfinance initiative can invite their spouses to be part of women-only solidarity groups as borrowers, in order to see whether potential frictions could be eliminated as a way better to enhance women empowerment and provide for improved access to health and education at the household level. The main challenges of implementing this type of intervention as revealed through the experience to date in the South Mexican experiment are described. Finally, a fifth section spells out some concluding remarks.

Suggested Citation

  • Beatriz Armendariz & Nigel Roome, 2008. "Empowering women via microfinance in fragile states," Working Papers CEB 08-001.RS, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
  • Handle: RePEc:sol:wpaper:08-001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://dipot.ulb.ac.be/dspace/bitstream/2013/14557/1/rou-0187.pdf
    File Function: rou-0187
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Siwan Anderson & Jean-Marie Baland, 2002. "The Economics of Roscas and Intrahousehold Resource Allocation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 117(3), pages 963-995.
    2. Duflo, Esther & Glennerster, Rachel & Kremer, Michael, 2008. "Using Randomization in Development Economics Research: A Toolkit," Handbook of Development Economics, in: T. Paul Schultz & John A. Strauss (ed.), Handbook of Development Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 61, pages 3895-3962, Elsevier.
    3. Mark M. Pitt & Shahidur R. Khandker, 1998. "The Impact of Group-Based Credit Programs on Poor Households in Bangladesh: Does the Gender of Participants Matter?," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 106(5), pages 958-996, October.
    4. Duraisamy, P., 1992. "Gender, Intrafamily Allocation of Resources and Child Schooling in South India," Papers 667, Yale - Economic Growth Center.
    5. Duncan Thomas, 1994. "Like Father, like Son; Like Mother, like Daughter: Parental Resources and Child Height," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 29(4), pages 950-988.
    6. Jonathan Morduch, 1998. "Does Microfinance Really Help the Poor? New Evidence from Flagship Programs in Bangladesh," Working Papers 198, Princeton University, Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs, Research Program in Development Studies..
    7. Khandker, S.R. & Khalily, B. & Khan, Z., 1995. "Grameen Bank: Performance and Sustainability," World Bank - Discussion Papers 306, World Bank.
    8. 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.
    9. Engle, Patrice L., 1993. "Influences of mothers' and fathers' income on children's nutritional status in Guatemala," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 37(11), pages 1303-1312, December.
    10. Beatriz Armendariz & Jonathan Morduch, 2007. "The Economics of Microfinance," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262512017, December.
    11. Siwan Anderson & Jean-Marie Baland, 2002. "The Economics of Roscas and Intrahousehold Resource Allocation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 117(3), pages 963-995.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ngo, Thi Minh-Phuong & Wahhaj, Zaki, 2012. "Microfinance and gender empowerment," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(1), pages 1-12.
    2. Boris Branisa & Carolina Cardona, 2015. "Social Institutions and Gender Inequality in Fragile States: Are they relevant for the Post-MDG Debate?," Development Research Working Paper Series 06/2015, Institute for Advanced Development Studies.
    3. Namizata Binaté Fofana & Gerrit Antonides & Anke Niehof & Johan Ophem, 2015. "How microfinance empowers women in Côte d’Ivoire," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 13(4), pages 1023-1041, December.

    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. Matthias Doepke & Michèle Tertilt, 2019. "Does female empowerment promote economic development?," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 24(4), pages 309-343, December.
    2. Ashraf, Nava & Karlan, Dean & Yin, Wesley, 2010. "Female Empowerment: Impact of a Commitment Savings Product in the Philippines," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 333-344, March.
    3. Jean-Marie Baland & Roberta Ziparo, 2017. "Intra-household bargaining in poor countries," WIDER Working Paper Series wp-2017-108, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    4. Deschênes, Sarah & Dumas, Christelle & Lambert, Sylvie, 2020. "Household resources and individual strategies," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    5. Alem, Yonas & Hassen, Sied & Köhlin, Gunnar, 2023. "Decision-making within the household: The role of division of labor and differences in preferences," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 207(C), pages 511-528.
    6. Ashraf, Nava & Karlan, Dean S. & Yin, Wesley, 2006. "Household Decision Making and Savings Impacts: Further Evidence from a Commitment Savings Product in the Philippines," Center Discussion Papers 28399, Yale University, Economic Growth Center.
    7. Alem, Yonas & Hassen, Sied & Köhlin, Gunnar, 2018. "Decision-making within the Household: The Role of Autonomy and Differences in Preferences," Working Papers in Economics 724, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
    8. Paolo Casini & Olivia Riera & Paulo Santos Monteiro, 2014. "Labor market effects of improved access to credit among the poor: evidence from Cape Verde," Working Papers of LICOS - Centre for Institutions and Economic Performance 484951, KU Leuven, Faculty of Economics and Business (FEB), LICOS - Centre for Institutions and Economic Performance.
    9. Jean-Marie Baland & Roberta Ziparo, 2017. "Intra-household bargaining in poor countries," WIDER Working Paper Series 108, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    10. Grant Miller & A. Mushfiq Mobarak, 2013. "Gender Differences in Preferences, Intra-Household Externalities, and Low Demand for Improved Cookstoves," NBER Working Papers 18964, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Carlsson, Fredrik & Yang, Xiaojun, 2013. "Intertemporal Choice Shifts in Households: Do they occur and are they good?," Working Papers in Economics 569, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
    12. Anderson, Siwan & Eswaran, Mukesh, 2009. "What determines female autonomy? Evidence from Bangladesh," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(2), pages 179-191, November.
    13. Richard Disney & Eleonora Fischera & Trudy Owens, 2010. "Has the Introduction of Microfinance Crowded-out Informal Loans in Malawi?," Discussion Papers 10/08, University of Nottingham, CREDIT.
    14. Augsburg, Britta & Malde, Bansi & Olorenshaw, Harriet & Wahhaj, Zaki, 2023. "To invest or not to invest in sanitation: The role of intra-household gender differences in perceptions and bargaining power," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    15. Arthi, Vellore & Fenske, James, 2016. "Intra-household labor allocation in colonial Nigeria," Explorations in Economic History, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 69-92.
    16. de Nicola, Francesca & Giné, Xavier, 2014. "How accurate are recall data? Evidence from coastal India," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 52-65.
    17. Doepke, M. & Tertilt, M., 2016. "Families in Macroeconomics," Handbook of Macroeconomics, in: J. B. Taylor & Harald Uhlig (ed.), Handbook of Macroeconomics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 1789-1891, Elsevier.
    18. Paolo Casini & Lore Vandewalle & Zaki Wahhaj, 2017. "Public Good Provision in Indian Rural Areas: The Returns to Collective Action by Microfinance Groups," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank Group, vol. 31(1), pages 97-128.
    19. Thomas TB Baudin & Bram De Rock & Paula Eugenia Gobbi, 2021. "Economics and Family Structures," Working Papers ECARES 2021-21, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    20. Jonathan Robinson, 2012. "Limited Insurance within the Household: Evidence from a Field Experiment in Kenya," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 4(4), pages 140-164, October.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:sol:wpaper:08-001. 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: Benoit Pauwels (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cebulbe.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.