Brian Claire David Drew Elyse Erin Helena Ieva Madeline Natalie Vanessa Victoria

5 Comments to “Micro-Financing, Macro-Effect!”

  1. joel barr

    May 25th, 2010

    Helena: So true! Teach an “man” to fish and buy him the net..then you have successful long term solutions. What is even more ionteresting are the stats on successful change and gender…women are not only more relaiable on paying these loans off but the impact on the family and the education of children is also much greater when women are in charge! { although considering 50% of small business in the west fail the developing world stats on even men are amazing!}. Keep thinking!!!

  2. Abid

    May 28th, 2010

    Great post Helena, I’ve supported Kiva for the past couple years and I love the concept of micro-financing. It has taken some time to make practices of managing it efficient but if done well, it can revolutionize what development means. Keep up the great blogging!

  3. Elyse Holmes

    May 31st, 2010

    Helena, so true! That’s why I love World Vision’s holiday gifts. Instead of buying my grandparents and teachers something so-so for themselves, I get a goat or bees for a family to start a business! Self sustainability is much more valuable than a one-time gift, plus what a confidence booster it must be for these people to no longer need to rely on international aid.

  4. Emily

    Jun 2nd, 2010

    Great post Helena, I’ve supported Kiva for the past couple years and I love the concept of micro-financing. It has taken some time to make practices of managing it efficient but if done well, it can revolutionize what development means. Keep up the great blogging!

  5. Anonymous

    Oct 31st, 2010

    Helena, you present a very interesting opinion on micro-financing. However, I’d like to disagree with you on several key points you make. First of all, the statistic that 98% of businesses are infallible is completely false, especiall in developing countries. In fact, most businesses fail. If 98% of businesses were successful, Africa would have its own super-economy by now. Why would the stats say otherwise? Because, in developing countries, businesses are not registered unless they are successful enough for some time. Therefore only successful businesses register and only 2% of these already-successful firms fail.

    Secondly, all you can really do is, give that woman $100. How she chooses to spend it depends on her. If she was starving kids, she WILL feed them before taking a risk and opening a business. Besides, with the economies of scale that modern corporations have, she would not stand to even regain her start up capital.

    Thirdly and most importantly, giving a woman $100 will not lead to long term sustainable growth, because as a study of business history will prove, economies have advanced as technology has advanced. Even if the woman decides to buy hens, she would take too long to get to a level where she creates more efficient and advanced technology.

    I think that instead of thinking of microfinancing in terms of small amounts, we should take it to a new level. Everyone should be able to give $100 towards a fund. As soon as $500K is raised, you let businessmen in that country have access to the funds on a needs-basis (or you could turn it into Dragon’s Den: Africa). This will lead them to make bigger firms that can actually compete with MNCs. As the country’s entrepreneurship resource is tapped, more capital will flow in and this will lead to a more efficient use of human and natural resources within the nation.


Leave a Reply