Payments from Domestic Migrants Dwarf International Remittances

Despite a lot of excitement about global payments, we are just beginning to learn the most basic facts about them– how much money is sent by whom, to whom, where, and how.  International remittances flows could reach $515 billion by the year 2015 and are slowly starting to receive the attention they deserve from policymakers.  Now, a new set of Gates reports on payments in Africa and Asia shows that domestic remittances may far surpass international remittances in frequency and magnitude . . . 

Read More

Fighting Poverty, Profitably: A New Report on Payment Systems

A recent report of the Gates Foundation, from their program on Financial Services for the Poor, highlights payment systems as a way of “Fighting Poverty, Profitably” – as the report says in its title.  Payment systems, according to the report, “could serve as the connective tissue for bringing a broader array of financial services to the poor”.

The report brings together the existing data on payment systems to analyze how potential payments service providers could profitably extend their services to underserved populations in developing countries.  They identify four cost and revenue centers – accounts, cash-in-cash-out, transfers, and what they term “adjacencies” – in their framework, and argue for revenue models built on three of the four (cash-in-cash-out, transfers, and adjacencies) to best give companies an incentive to serve the poor.

In countries that have already embraced mobile payment systems, such as Kenya, some of the most exciting action is occurring in adjacencies . . . 

Read More

A New Agenda on Remittances, Payments, and Development: 12 Better Research Questions

Migrants send a lot of money to developing countries—several times more than foreign aid. Researchers and policymakers have seized on these very large flows and built an agenda to understand how these remittances can foster development. Indeed, you most often hear remittance flows compared to aid flows.

Something fundamental is wrong with this agenda however. Researchers tend to study remittances as if they were windfall income, like aid or oil revenue, that arrives like manna from heaven. This leads researchers toward the kind of questions you might ask about windfall income: Are remittances spent on ‘good’ things like investment and education? Do families and countries become ‘dependent’ on remittances?

Read More

Why Aren't Users Paying with Mobile Money?

On the Center for Financial Inclusion blog, Ignacio Mas and Beth Rhyne are discussing a central question in the evolution of electronic payments in developing countries: why aren't people using it to pay? Even in countries like Kenya with very high rates of adoption of a electronic payment platform, the vast majority of money that goes into the system come back out into physical cash in 24 to 48 hours. Ignacio makes a case that electronic payments systems need to be more integrated into other financial behaviors, like savings and credit, before they will be used for routine payments. The reason is fairly simple: unless you are storing value in the electronic system (as with a savings account) using the electronic system for a payment involves at least one extra step to turn cash into electronic form.

Beth responds that if people are receiving their income in electronic form in the first place, like benefits payments or paychecks, and the merchants they frequent take payment in electronic form then there is good reason for users to keep their money in the electronic system. Using Ignacio's same logic, cashing out involves an extra step if the inflow is electronic and the outflow can be electronic. Beth's argument is one of the reasons organizations like the Better than Cash Alliance are focused on encouraging governments to use electronic payments to pay salaries or benefits to households . . . 

Read More

Samantha Duncan on the Books and Papers that Influenced her Thinking on Insurance

FAI asked Samantha Duncan to tell us about the research papers and books that have influenced how she thinks about insurance. This is what she told us:

My thinking on insurance has evolved and been influenced by personal experiences, but also some books and papers. I am a practitioner at heart, and my earliest thinking came from spending time inside the homes of poor people across Latin America and Asia; getting to know them, their families, and how they live their lives. However, there have also been a number of research papers and books that have had a tremendous impact on my thinking and work. I’ve outlined some of the ideas that have deeply resonated with me below.

Insight 1: The risks poor people face are debilitating. There is a cycle of poverty . . . 

Read More

Knowing is Half the Battle: Unpacking Financial Literacy

The opening of the new Affordable Care Act health insurance marketplaces presents millions of Americans with a complicated financial decision. How do they value insurance? The marketplaces will primarily serve people who are not employed full time or are in low-wage jobs—and are therefore likely to be juggling tight finances already. What is the cost of paying down debt more slowly to buy insurance? The obvious intervention to help people make better financial decisions when faced with complex options is financial literacy.

Unfortunately, the evidence on financial literacy is pretty dismal. David McKenzie’s study of a voluntary financial literacy program in Mexico that finds no effect is pretty representative. Earlier this year, author Helaine Olen wrote that financial literacy is “a bunch of hooey,” Jason Zweig at The Wall Street Journal cited educational programs that actually make people worse off financially, and FINRA released a study showing that financial literacy among Americans has weakened since 2009.

While financial literacy levels are linked to better financial decisions, study after study shows that financial literacy courses are ineffective . . . 

Read More

A Milestone in the Great Debate over a Microcredit Impact Study

This summer the Journal of Development Studies accepted a manuscript by Jonathan Morduch and myself laying out our critique of an influential microcredit study from the 1990s by Mark Pitt of Brown University and Shahidur Khandker of the World Bank. Our article should appear in the journal this year or next. The acceptance is milestone for Jonathan and me, for it represents a ratification of our work, and is very long in coming.

It was 15 years ago that Jonathan first laid out his doubts about Pitt and Khandker (P&K). Pitt retorted the next year. And there the dispute rested, never adjudicated by journals, until I entered the picture 6 years ago by writing a program that, for the first time, allowed an exact replication of P&K’s math.

Jonathan and I have played a sort of doubles match with Mark and Shahid . . . 

Read More

Who Will Pay for Financial Inclusion?

A dinner I attended on Monday night previewed the upcoming Financial Inclusion 2020 Global Summit in London. The Summit’s ultimate goal is to include 2.5 billion more people in the formal financial system by 2020.  It was an interesting (off the record) conversation. Without violationg the rules of engagement, I want to focus in on a topic I raised: Who is going to pay for financial inclusion? 

Providing financial services to poor households has been and will continue to be expensive. While technology (like electronic payments) and innovative approaches (like KGFS) can reduce costs, they cannot make serving poor customers cost- or profit-competitive with serving wealthier customers.  The bottom line is that including 2.5 billion people in the financial system is going to cost money. Someone will have to pay.

Read More

Some Thoughts on Scarcity

Underlying, sometimes deeply underlying, much of the conversation about financial services for poor households is the question of how much control poor households have over their lives and how capable they are of making good choices. The Yunus theory of microcredit assumes that the poor have a great deal of control--the only thing they lack is credit. Once they have it, they can make smart, informed choices about how to use capital to improve their lives. The growing enthusiasm for cash-transfer-style programs is built on similar foundations. Paul Niehaus, one of the founders of GiveDirectly, a new charity that focuses on unconditional cash transfers for poor households in Kenya (if you don't know GiveDirectly, do listen to the This American Life story about them), often talks about a core motivation of the approach being the belief that poor households know better how to spend cash than outsiders do. . . . 

Read More

New Paper on Impact of Savings Groups on Poor African Women

Self-funded groups are an increasingly common way of delivering microfinance services. In India, for example, self-help groups increased their membership dramatically in Andhra Pradesh after the microfinance crisis of 2009-2010. In Africa, several international NGOs are promoting village savings and loans associations (VSLAs) as member-driven, local institutions.

Can these groups “replace” traditional microfinance, in the sense that they do not need the intervention of loan officers or professional managers? An interesting paper contributes to answering this question . . . 

Read More

Asset Transfers for (Pre-) Entrepreneurs: Evidence from Chile

The original theory of microcredit was that it offered the opportunity for poor households to create profitable microenterprises. But there were always households left behind—those that were too poor to create a microenterprise or plausibly repay even the very small loans on offer.

One attempt to address these households, usually called the “ultra poor,” was to create an asset transfer and training program that would allow them to “graduate” into standard microcredit. BRAC’s Targeting the Ultra Poor program is perhaps the best known of these. Evaluations of TUP-style programs have been mixed – with some showing no effect and others strong effects. It seems that a major factor is local labor markets—when ultra poor households have good wage labor alternatives, asset transfers do not help much. When local labor markets are thin or non-existent, asset transfers can make a big difference . . . 

Read More

From Responsible Finance to Suitable Finance: Financial Engineering for Low-Income Households

This post is written by Bindu Ananth and Amit Shah. Bindu Ananth is President of the IFMR Trust and Amit Shah is Head of  Business Intelligence at IFMR Rural Finance. They co-edited the recently published book “Financial Engineering for Low-Income Households.”

Five years ago when we set up the KGFS model of financial institutions in remote-rural India, we wanted to make a fundamental shift in the way financial services were offered to households. We wanted the organising principle to be suitability, i.e., how do we make sure that every single customer receives the portfolio of financial services that is most suitable given her needs and preferences? This is essentially what wealth managers are supposed to do for ultra-rich individuals but we wanted to do it for clients with a mean income of USD 1000 per year through staff with twelve years of formal education . . . 

Read More

A Terrific Reference—or Primer—on Microinsurance Take-up

Take-up of formal microinsurance products remain low around the world, typically ranging from 0 to 30-40 percent depending on the type of product and the conditions of the offer. A growing literature is testing various determinants of take-up, although little has been done to step back and consider what we have learned as a whole.

That’s a problem because the issues are complicated and multi-layered. There’s a high probability of being misled by any particular finding from the research when designing new products.

Michal Matul, Aparna Dalal, Ombeline De Bock and Wouter Gelade have done a huge service to the sector, then, in a new paper presented at the Third European Research Conference on Microfinance, held June 10-12 in Norway. Their paper is a must-read for anybody interested in microinsurance, particularly in understanding and overcoming the puzzle of low take-up for both first sales and renewals of purchases. The latter has been little considered, yet renewal rates tend to be even lower than first-sale rates . . . 

Read More

Informal Insurance, Basis Risk and the Demand for Microinsurance

The literature on microinsurance is growing. A series of studies have been published in recent years that look at determinants of (generally low) take-up of microinsurance products, particularly index insurance products. Some work is also being done looking at the impact of offering insurance to farmers.

At the Third European conference on microfinance, held June 10-12 in Norway, Mark Rosenzweig shared some interesting results on the take-up of rainfall microinsurance in India, and its impact on risk-taking. He particularly addresses two important determinants of take-up and impact that have so far received limited attention: basis risk (that is, the risk for a client that the insurance may not pay out when he or she experiences an actual loss due to the possible difference in rainfall at the weather station and on his or her plot), and the complementarity of formal microinsurance with informal insurance mechanisms . . . 

Read More

New Research from the American Economic Review

The American Economic Association (AEA) recently released the Papers and Proceedings issue of its journal American Economic Review, which presents selected papers from the AEA's annual meeting. The AER is one of the premier economics journals and has very broad coverage. For instance, you can learn everything you never knew you wanted to know about income and church attendance in nineteenth century Prussia. Happily, this volume also includes a number of papers relating to mobile money, credit, savings, and insurance.

Mobile Money

In their study, William Jack, Adam Ray, and Tavneet Suri investigate how households using M-PESA interact with and exploit their informal networks when making transactions. The authors find M-PESA users have more remittance activity, make transfers over distances greater than 100 km, and have more reciprocal transactions than non-users.

While Jack et al. looked at volume of transactions, David Weil and Isaac Mbiti used aggregate data in their research on the velocity of mobile money. One of the more intriguing findings is that withdrawals are made frequently and in small amounts, even though users can reduce fees if they group withdrawals. As the use of mobile money grows in other countries (M-PESA recently launched in India, for instance) it will be interesting to see how similar these (and previous) findings are in different cultural contexts.

Gender and Finance

Using data from over 30,000 firms in 90 developing countries, Elizabeth Asiedu, Isaac Kalonda-Kanyama, Leonce Ndikumana, and Akwasi Nti-Adde analyze whether gender is a determinant in financing constraints and access to credit for firms. They find that indeed, female-owned firms are more likely to be financially constrained than male-owned counterparts but only in the sub-Saharan African region. There is no gender gap in other regions but small firms are more likely to be financially constrained than larger firms, and foreign-owned firms are less likely to be constrained than domestically owned firms.

Moving from the macro to the micro level, Carolina Castilla and Thomas Walker investigate gendered dynamics of intra-household financial decisions in their paper. In a field experiment in Southern Ghana, researchers conducted public and private lotteries with cash and in-kind prizes to observe the effects of these windfalls on household allocations. They found “husbands' public windfalls increase investment in assets and social capital, while there is no such effect when wives win. Private windfalls of both spouses are committed to cash (wives) or in-kind gifts (husband) which are either difficult to monitor or to reverse if discovered by the other spouse.”

Risk

We return to Kenya with Michael Kremer, Jean Lee, Jonathan Robinson, and Olga Rostapshova in their study on behavioral biases and firm behavior. Among a sample of Kenyan shopkeepers, those with lower math skills were less accepting of small-scale risk and were also less likely to have larger inventories than those with higher scores. There are some interesting observations in the paper on the connection between loss aversion and microfinance, suggesting that small business owners are less likely to access microcredit if risk averse and social safety nets could possibly help increase investment in these enterprises.

Similarly, Ahmed Mushfiq Mobarak and Mark R. Rosenzweig look at risk in the context of the Indian insurance market, specifically rainfall insurance. Their findings show that when insured farmers took greater risks, wage levels increased but so did the volatility of labor demand, creating a threat to landless workers. When offered the choice, landless workers also purchased insurance when contracts were offered to farmers.

Savings

Lastly, Suresh de Mel, Craig McIntosh, and Christopher Woodruff report the findings of their field experiment in rural Sri Lanka that tested the efficacy of various methods of collecting deposits in formal bank accounts. Although their research shows frequent, face-to-face collection increases aggregate household savings, collections using community lock boxes affected the number of transactions but not the overall level of savings.

How the Poor are Saving for Change

Last month Oxfam America, Freedom from Hunger, and the Strømme Foundation released the results of a three year in-depth study evaluating their joint Savings for Change (SfC) program in Mali. The study, implemented by IPA and the Bureau of Applied Research in Anthropology at the University of Arizona, combined an RCT and ethnographic research techniques over a period of three years resulting in arguably the broadest and deepest rigorous evaluation of a savings program we have.

SfC currently operates in 13 countries in West Africa, Latin America, and Asia but the program in Mali is one of the largest. Since 2005, women in the program have formed small groups that meet regularly and require members to contribute to a joint savings fund. Members then take out loans from the pot at an agreed upon interest rate. At a predetermined annual date, the fund is divided among members and returns can be anywhere from 30-40% or higher. The timing of the payout usually coincides with planting season, festivals, or other periods when there is a greater need for increased cash flow. For this study, researchers randomly selected villages to receive the SfC program from a pool of 500. They also conducted ethnographic case studies and the quantitative data necessary for the impact evaluation . . . 

Read More

Rigorous Evaluation: Not an Afterthought

There's a new piece in Foreign Policy magazine which takes a tough look at Jeff Sachs and the Millenium Villages Project--not in regard to results or interventions, but in regard to evaluation. The project was always pitched as a demonstration of a "different" approach to ending poverty that could provide a blueprint for addressing poverty globally. 

As the piece explains--citing FAI's founder Jonathan Morduch, FAI Affiliate Michael Clemens, Ted Miguel from UC-Berkeley and Nancy Birdsall from CGD, among others--that is no longer a realistic option. The project wasn't structured to allow for the kind of rigorous evaluation that would give it credibility as a demonstration or a justification for scale-up. While it seems there is now an effort to do more rigorous evaluation, for most aspects of the project it is simply too late to establish the comparisons and baselines necessary for credible claims of impact . . . 

Read More

Vulnerability: The 2013 Microcredit Summit Campaign Report

In 2011, microfinance providers reached fewer total people than they did in 2010, as well as fewer people living in extreme poverty, according to the 2013 State of the Campaign Report, which is released annually by the Microcredit Summit Campaign. Entitled “Vulnerability,” the report presents some stark findings. This is the first time the number of microfinance clients has decreased since the Campaign began its conducting research on the industry in 1998. This overall decrease occurred despite an expansion of 1.4 million more clients in sub-Saharan Africa. Most of this reduction occurred in India, and was in part due to the microfinance crisis that began in Andhra Pradesh in late 2010.

There are a number of reasons for the slowdown. Microfinance institutions (MFIs) are more likely to go to markets that have already proven to be successful. Reaching poorer and more remote clients is generally more difficult and costly for organizations. Additionally, data limitations make it hard to know when local markets are saturated. Maturing markets, the global economic crisis, investor wariness, and donor fatigue also contributed to the slowdown . . . 

Read More