Including the Excluded:
Lessons Learned From The Poverty Targeting Strategies Used By Micro-Finance Providers
June, 2001
Alison Mathie, PhD
The Coady International Institute, St. Francis Xavier University
Abstract
How do micro-finance providers make sure that their services reach the poor? This paper looks at the different poverty targeting strategies used by micro-finance providers, and shows how the choice of targeting strategy can be partly explained by the provider's assumptions about how poverty alleviation and economic development occur. The paper draws on the findings of research conducted in 1998 by the Coady International Institute, under the auspices of the Consultative Group to Assist the Poorest. Information was collected on the poverty targeting strategies of 25 micro-finance providers around the world and was summarized previously in a compendium for use by practitioners in the micro-finance field. This paper provides an analysis of the different poverty targeting strategies from that compendium. The case is made for treating poverty targeting as a combination of identifying the poor, reaching the poor, attracting the poor, and discouraging the non-poor. In developing a poverty targeting strategy, all of these elements need to be taken into consideration.
Including the Excluded: Lessons Learned From The Poverty Targeting Strategies Used By Micro-Finance Providers
In many countries the availability of micro-finance can contribute greatly to development efforts among the poorest segments of society. In recognition of this role, The Micro-Credit Summit was convened in Washington DC in 1997 bringing together practitioners in non-government, government and private sectors to discuss the potential of micro-finance combat poverty. Representatives at this summit set an ambitious goal: access to credit for 100 million of the world's poorest families by the year 2005. Though controversial, this goal set in motion a rapid expansion of the micro-finance industry, much of it driven by donor agencies, who established goals for targeting the poor for their services. Consequently, in 1998 the Coady International Institute, under the auspices of the Consultative Group to Assist the Poorest (CGAP)1 collected information on the poverty targeting strategies of 25 micro-finance providers around the world and summarized the data in a compendium for use by practitioners in the micro-finance field.2
In this paper I examine the strategies employed by these micro-finance providers to target the poor, and provide an analysis of how these strategies differ, depending on the mandate and the development paradigm of the provider. Examining the context of micro-finance service provision is useful for understanding trends in poverty targeting, especially the current pressures for organizations to demonstrate financial self-sufficiency. On the one hand, the goal of achieving a broader outreach to the poor seems to strain against the goal of financial self-sufficiency of the micro-finance provider (Otero, 1994). On the other hand, the achievement of financial self-sufficiency is seen by others (Accion International, 1998; Seibel, 1998) as essential for sustainable and cost-effective poverty reduction.
The relevance of this debate on poverty targeting is analyzed by examining the research conducted for the compendium of poverty targeting strategies used by micro-finance providers. The compendium contributions illustrate how different targeting methods combine to form particular strategies that are in tune with the mandate and rationale of each micro-finance provider. These contributions imply [From these data I conclude?] that a narrow view of the costs and effects of targeting is of limited usefulness when considered in isolation from the added-value of targeting, and the non-financial services that may accompany micro-finance service delivery.
The Context
Micro-finance service delivery operates by providing small loans and savings facilities to those who are excluded from commercial financial services. This delivery has been promoted as a key strategy for reducing poverty, as well as for stimulating sustainable economic growth through self-employment and small enterprise development. Access to these facilities is assumed to provide the poor with the means (a) to cushion themselves against economic shocks, (b) to achieve self-reliance through entrepreneurship, and (c) to achieve social empowerment. Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) have been active promoters of this strategy, acting locally in the delivery of micro-finance services, while simultaneously participating in the global debates about the possibilities for, and implications of, integration of these services into the commercial banking sector. This debate is rooted in paradigmatic differences, couched in terms of "the need for economic efficiency" versus "the need for social equity" (Dunford, 1998, p. 2); "market led growth" versus "poverty alleviation" (Kantor, 1998, p. 3); or the "financial market paradigm" versus the "directed credit paradigm" (Vogel & Adams, 1997, p. 361). These in turn have informed heated discussions about the relationship between financial self-sufficiency of the micro-finance industry and its outreach to the poor, particularly the poorest. Thus, although the supporters of the financial market paradigm proponents argue that only the financially sustainable providers can maximize outreach to the poor on an ongoing basis (Accion International, 1998; Seibel, 1998; Vogel & Adams, 1997), supporters of directed savings and credit—often with additional services ("credit plus")—argue that such a market driven paradigm fails to provide the poor with skills and resources required to ensure sustained impact (Dawson, 1998).
The Debate on Outreach Versus Impact and Efficiency
Under scrutiny are two issues: the extent to which micro-finance services have reached the poor clients for whom they are intended; and the impact that such outreach is likely to have. An important distinction is that although micro-finance programs may have the social objective of reducing poverty, the intention of many is to achieve this not by targeting the poorest of the poor, but by targeting the poorest of the economically active. Many of these potential clients could fall into the category of the bottom 50% of those whose income is below the poverty line—"the poorest of the poor" by CGAP's definition—but the micro-finance provider rarely targets the full range within that category, nor restricts services exclusively to that category. This caveat aside, various studies now indicate the limited extent to which micro-finance providers that intend to reach the poorest are able to do so (Hashemi, 1997; Hulme & Mosely, 1996; Mosely & Hulme, 1998; Seibel & Parhusip, 1997).
On the question of impact, Gulli (1998) points to the synergy effects of financial service outreach and other services and supports. Without this synergy, the positive impact of access to financial services may be hard to realize. Also, to examine the impact of targeting strategies without an appreciation for the institutional context of micro-credit delivery can be dangerously short sighted. As Scoggins points out, targeting the poor shifts attention away from the broader benefits of member/client-owned institutions. These have "a much more holistic view of community and are much less focused on selective (and in many cases artificial and divisive) targeting."3
When the donors of micro-finance providers fund programs on the understanding that the poor are being targeted, and are benefiting, the question arises of how micro-finance providers target the poor; the effectiveness and value-added dimension of these strategies becomes a subject of keen interest. The poverty targeting strategies documented in the compendium shed light on this question. In the following subsections, the background to the collection of poverty targeting strategies is given, followed by preliminary findings on the nature of targeting and its rationale.
The Compendium of Poverty Targeting Strategies
With the collaboration of CGAP working group members, information on poverty targeting strategies was solicited from 35 micro-finance providers. The 25 institutions that responded employ a range of strategies in 20 different countries in Asia, Africa, Latin America, and the Middle East. These different strategies are presented in the compendium on an institution-by-institution basis, illustrating the choice of targeting strategy in the context of the provider's mandate, its rationale for poverty targeting, the additional benefits associated with that targeting strategy, and the challenges faced in its application.
Of the 25 micro-finance providers represented in the compendium, 15 are non-profit organizations implementing micro-finance programs only, five are non-profits with multi-sector programs, and three are for-profit institutions. The names and acronyms of all 25 contributors are listed in the appended glossary. In text acronyms are used hereafter. Two are special cases: DID in Mali is a non-profit arm of the credit union Desjardins; Trickle Up is a non-profit which provides savings services and small grants (not credit) in Guatemala. Despite solicitations, we were unable to collect information from government backed schemes (such as Bank Rakyat, Indonesia), or increase the number of contributions from the commercial sector.
The Rationale for Poverty Targeting
The term targeting has been associated with delivering a particular service or intervention to an identifiable set of clients. For this reason, contributors to the compendium were encouraged to view their methods of attracting particular clients as targeting methods, equally relevant as methods of identifying and reaching clients in more conventional targeting approaches. From these contributions of different methods, five elements of a poverty targeting strategy become clear:
Based on the contributions to the compendium, the rationale for poverty targeting can be expressed in three broad categories:
1. It is justified on the grounds of equity: For all respondents, there is an underlying moral imperative expressed as a desire to help those in need; to enable the poor to break out of a poverty trap induced by drought, civil war and neglect; to alleviate extreme poverty; to restore dignity to a segment of the poor who are exploited and impoverished; to reverse the process of marginalization of the poor, particularly in the face of the impact of structural adjustment programs; and to empower poor women. In other words, the rationale for poverty targeting is in the redistributive paradigm of including the otherwise excluded.
2. It is essential for broad-based development: In the case of Grameen Bank and its replicas, the rationale for stringent targeting of the poor is that broad-based social and economic development cannot occur unless poverty is reduced. The Association for Social Advancement (ASA), Bangladesh, expresses a similar sentiment: "Social development is contingent upon economic emancipation." Targeting is seen therefore as a way of mobilizing the poor through incremental savings and credit so that they can contribute to, and benefit from, a growth economy.
3. It is a way of ensuring high repayment rates: Exclusive targeting of the poor may also have a financial rationale. Because the poor are more likely to accept the discipline required of participating members, the micro-finance provider can expect a good repayment rate (Grameen, Bangladesh) if the poor are actively targeted. The reliability of poor women in terms of loan repayment is cited as an additional reason for a gendered targeting strategy (Kalanjiam, India).
Methods of Poverty Targeting
The poverty targeting strategies of most of the 25 micro-finance providers include all five of the complementary components of targeting (identifying the poor, reaching the poor, attracting the poor, excluding the non-poor, and discouraging the non-poor). It is important to recognize that although some providers may emphasize one component over another in their targeting strategy, to a greater or lesser extent all components are combined to achieve maximum effect. Also, some providers use different targeting strategies depending on the local economic and social circumstances, as documented by Friends of Women's World Banking (1998)—for example, in the case of Kalanjiam. It is also important to point out that some micro-finance providers—especially those which are oriented to a financially self-sustaining operation—do not target the poor exclusively, but endeavor to include a mix of non-poor and poor and provide customized financial services. These different components of poverty targeting are elaborated in the following subsections.
Ways of Identifying and Reaching the Poor
The first stage in identifying the poor is the identification of geographic areas in which poverty is concentrated. The use of government statistics, for example, can enable the micro-finance provider to identify areas as extensive as the Northern Areas and Chitral of Pakistan, or as limited as pockets of poverty in the West Bank of Palestine, or in metro Manila in the Philippines. At a higher level of precision are methods requiring local and subjective identification of the poor, or the use of objective indexes to both identify the poor and simultaneously exclude the non-poor.
Local and subjective methods. These methods include the identification of the poor by their peers who are forming, for example, a savings and credit group (CRS, CAM, ASA). Eligibility criteria may be set down by the micro-finance provider for use by community members to identify candidates for group membership (for example, the criteria prescribed by ASA are: landlessness, income of less than $45 per year, capability to work in income generating activity, married status, and female gender). Typically, judgments of eligibility are made not just on the basis of poverty status, but also on criteria unrelated to poverty such as trustworthiness ("character referencing"). Also in this category are participatory wealth ranking methods by which reference groups in the target communities rank households according to their relative wealth on the basis of community-defined poverty/wealth criteria. SEF in South Africa and Kalanjiam in India are proponents of this approach.
Objective indexes, surveys, assets and means tests. Objective indexes identify the poor by employing criteria applicable across different sites. They are typically administered by field staff. Examples of these are the housing index (DECSI; SHARE; Project Dungganon; Nirdhan; AIM) and the poverty assessment tools administered by Trickle-Up, using locally determined, observable characteristics of poverty. The next level of precision, if required, is the means or assets test that serves to both confirm eligibility and to identify the precise degree of poverty.
Identification of the poor has to be combined with active outreach for targeting to be effective. The promotion and encouragement of eligible clients by fieldworkers are standard practice. For example, house-to-house promotion, community meetings, outreach to existing informal women's groups, the employment of female staff, and the facilitation of their field work are all promotional strategies that are an integral part of the targeting process, and are a conscious policy of the micro-finance provider (see Baydas, Graham, & Valenzuela, 1997, for documentation of this policy in the commercial banking sector).
Ways of Attracting the Poor
Another aspect of targeting is when customized design and marketing of financial products attract the target group to the micro-finance provider. This self-selection is a key component in any targeting strategy, and takes the form of removing constraints so that the poor select themselves as clients.
Micro-finance providers attract the very poor and the poorest by removing the constraints that have deterred the poor from using commercial financial services. They may be attracted by the opportunity to save voluntarily, to take out a small sized loan, or to borrow for "non-productive purposes" in times of crisis, or by the opportunity to purchase insurance. They may also be attracted by the security that group-lending schemes provide. A case in point is AKRSP where individuals can only borrow against their savings, thus protecting other members in the village organization (which takes out a group loan) from default by an individual borrower. The poor may also be attracted by the fact that group guarantee schemes replace the collateral that women, in particular, are unable to provide, the simplicity and convenience of application procedures, the size and types of loan available, and the flexible repayment terms. TSPI, for example, takes customized lending to the point of targeting a very particular client group; their "fixed asset loans" are strictly for street vendors for the purchase of a bicycle.
Ways of Discouraging or Excluding the Non-Poor
Although a diversified clientele and diversified portfolio are characteristic of many micro-finance providers, others have found that the participation of the non-poor in a micro-finance program discourages the poor from participating4 for reasons of low self-esteem. Hashemi (1997) notes that the hard-core poor "self-select" themselves out of the Grameen Bank schemes because "they are so destitute that they consider themselves not credit worthy" (p. 253). Micro-finance programs that encourage self-selection of the poor by removing constraints in the ways outlined above are often complemented by measures to discourage the non-poor, as outlined below.
Self-exclusion. Small loan size, high interest rates, and high opportunity costs of frequent group meetings are ways in which the provider screens for a client's level of commitment and her or his opportunities to access alternative financial service options. In most instances, the non-poor do not tolerate the high financial costs and the time commitments (transaction costs) of group meetings. In some situations, however, these measures are not sufficient to discourage the non-poor. For example, SEF found that where the availability of credit is very limited, the non-poor were prepared to tolerate small loans and frequent meetings in the hope of eventually graduating to bigger loans in subsequent loan cycles.
Eligibility criteria. Some eligibility criteria are sensitive with respect to including the poor, whereas others are more specific and exclusive of the non-poor. For example, gender and geographic criteria can allow inclusive targeting of the poor, but they are not specific to the poor and exclusive of the non-poor. Observable housing characteristics and minimum poverty or income levels are examples of criteria that have this specificity. As a result, it is possible to exclude the non-poor on the basis of tools using these types of criteria (such as a housing index or a poverty wealth ranking exercise).
Combining Targeting Methods To Form a Targeting Strategy
Typically, the micro-finance provider combines a number of different methods to form a unique poverty targeting strategy. The three cases presented below illustrate this point.
AIM, Malaysia (specialized micro-finance provider). First the area of highest density of poverty is identified using government statistics. Second, trained field staff apply a housing index, followed by a means test to exclude the non-poor. During this time, the purpose of the program and the micro-finance product features (customized to poor clients) are promoted to attract the poor to the program. Eligible members are invited to form a savings and credit group, and are provided with training.
AKRSP, Pakistan (multi-sectoral NGO). First an area of widespread poverty is selected for a multi-sectoral program, for example "the Northern Areas" of Pakistan. Village organizations are promoted as a mechanism for community development, with separate organizations promoted exclusively for women. Savings and credit programs operate through these organizations, which act as the contact point for all AKRSP's programs and services. People are attracted to the savings and credit program because of the group insurance, the opportunity to save and to borrow very small amounts, and the availability of loans for non-productive as well as productive purposes. The groups have significant discretionary power over issuing loans, as long as the overall operations of the savings and credit groups operate within stipulated guidelines. Over time, AKRSP introduces a more diversified range of financial products to cater to an increasingly diversified client market. At the same time, AKRSP extends its geographical outreach to start the process in motion again.
SEF, Southern Africa (micro-finance and small enterprise development). SEF had originally used an objective index (the Visual Indicator of Poverty Test) to identify the poor, combined with product design features, such as high interest rates and small initial loan size, to discourage the non-poor. Realizing this method of identification was not accurate and that the disincentives to the non-poor were not effective, poverty targeting was redesigned. In the new strategy a participatory wealth ranking exercise is conducted within the target area. Not only has this yielded more accurate results, it has the added advantage of providing an opportunity for awareness raising and motivation.
Targeting Costs and Benefits
The main intention of targeting is to increase the usage of the organization's services by those most in need. However, the process of targeting can increase costs of operation; the benefits of value added and effectiveness of efforts can contribute to an analysis of the cost/benefits.
Cost Considerations
Cost considerations are important for several reasons. First, the costs of targeting to the provider influence the degree to which it can achieve financial self-sufficiency, either because of the costs of poverty identification and outreach, or the transaction costs of administering small savings and loans, or both. Second, the costs of targeting the poor vary. Questions arise, such as: Should the provider serve as many poor people as possible for the least cost (where infrastructure is in place, for example), or spread itself thin in more remote areas, or work more intensively and over a longer period of time with the hard-core poor?
Respondents in our study noted a number of ways in which costs had influenced their targeting strategy. The cost of staff time to administer poverty identification tools was frequently mentioned. Project Dungganon, for example, has simplified its housing index for routine screening and now uses a means test only in the third and fifth borrowing cycles. The costs of reaching remote areas were also taken into account—ASA, for example, explicitly restricts its operations to areas where there is adequate infrastructure.
In contrast, Grameen Bank points to the costs of not targeting. This argument rests on the assumption that non-poor clients are less reliable because they are less desperate for the service, therefore a greater risk in terms of repayment. Their participation thus threatens the financial viability on which the poor depend. Other contributors draw attention to the leakage if resources designed for the poor are diverted to the non-poor, especially in donor subsidized programs. Targeting strategies that exclude the non-poor, as applied by several NGOs in the compendium, are particularly concerned about potential leakage.
Value Added Considerations
Contributors to the compendium were asked to consider the additional benefits of their targeting strategy. Several benefits were mentioned, in addition to the point frequently made that targeting is not a single event, but fully integrated into routine program delivery. The benefits mentioned include:
Effectiveness Considerations
Effectiveness of targeting implies the degree of success in reaching desired group of persons. Although effectiveness data are hard to verify, contributors estimated effectiveness by indicating the number of clients who fall into the "poorest of the poor" category at the time of their first loan5. AKRSP was exceptional in also being able to estimate its extent of coverage by indicating the proportion of potential clients actually served.
Weighing the Costs and Benefits
Contributors to the compendium were not asked to explain precisely how costs and benefits were weighed; however, patterns do emerge from the data that are worthy of further investigation. While all contributors are to some extent influenced by pressures to achieve financial self-sufficiency and to be cost effective in their targeting, there is less pressure when programs are less mature, and when the mandate of the organization is both to focus on the poorest and to provide additional complementary support services. In many cases, the costs of targeting for the micro-finance sector are difficult to separate from routine outreach of various services (the value-added dimension mentioned above). Also in question are the criteria for effectiveness. The effectiveness of targeting can be measured by the proportion of clients reached who fall into the target category, but such a measurement does not give an indication of coverage—the proportion of the total potential of the target group who access the service. Where targeting practices are an integral part of service delivery (informing clients, helping them to participate in targeting, forming groups, providing educational services), however, the more appropriate questions might be: How does targeting contribute to more effective program delivery and sustained impact? How does this get included in the costs/benefits ratio?
Conclusion: What Kind of Providers Do What Kind of Targeting?
Differences in poverty targeting strategies appear to depend on how much pressure there is for micro-finance service delivery to be financially self-sufficient, and also on whether financial service delivery is one of several complementary services.
All contributors in the compendium research used a combination of methods to target the poor (as emphasized in the previous sections) leading me to conclude in an earlier report (Mathie, 1998) that "targeting has as much to do with tailoring products to suit the client market as it does with identifying who is and who is not eligible for services" (p. xiv-xv). Further analysis, however, reveals two broadly different orientations with respect to targeting:
1. Targeting-plus ( borrowing from, and complementary to, the expression "credit-plus"). Here targeting is integrated with program delivery. CREDO, for example, has targeting and training going on simultaneously, as do others using the group solidarity approach to micro-finance provision (such as MEDA, CAM, and the Grameen replicas). Depending on how it is defined, targeting is seen as low cost because it is built into the costs of delivery, or a cost that is justified by the additional benefits it brings to service delivery (enhanced group solidarity, enhanced appreciation for the program, enhanced understanding of the precise nature of poverty). Typically, providers using this approach are operating in the redistributive paradigm of directed credit; they assume financial services by themselves are not sufficient to enable the poor to move out of poverty.
2. Targeting by attraction. Here the marketing model predominates. Products and services are designed to attract clients to the provider. These methods are less intrusive and less costly; they are favored by the providers who are committed to the financial market paradigm. Although more active targeting methods are also used, the main emphasis of the strategy is product design; they customize their products to different client markets, and through such diversification operate a self-sufficient operation. Providers favoring this targeting approach are more likely to be client-owned providers such as SANASA, DID, or those NGOs approaching financial self-sufficiency. AKRSP is one example of a provider using this approach; it is an NGO operation that is now close to being fully integrated with the commercial banking sector.
The costs of targeting by attraction may be less; however, some researchers (Dunford, 1998; Otero, 1994) raise concerns that outreach may be compromised by such a market-driven approach. The concerns are related not only to the special financial services (such as savings and insurance services) the very poor require over a long period of time until they are confident enough to take credit, but also to the training and educational activities characteristic of targeting-plus that may have to be carried out by other programs and other service providers. Such piggybacking may be formalized within a program or between two programs. AKRSP, for example, successfully fosters group organization and management of economic development by the target group, while stimulating the growth of a sustainable, inclusive (catering to both poor and non-poor) financial system integrated into the commercial banking sector. An example of collaboration between two agencies, one non-profit and the other commercially oriented, is the relationship between DID and FFH in Mali. DID uses credit product design to attract the poor, which is complemented by FFH's outreach, training, and education program.
Clearly, the rationale for a particular targeting strategy is influenced by the assumptions about the dynamics of economic and social change that underlie the design of each provider's policies and programs. According to Ruttan (1998), there is still debate on the particular relationship between poverty alleviation, sustainable economic growth and income distribution, and the conditions under which a financial system can be extended without prejudice or further damage to the poorest of the poor. Moreover, challenges continue to be made to an economic paradigm in which income, rather than a composite quality of life index, is the dominant indicator. Nevertheless, whether the poor are seen as a market niche or as the casualties of an exploitative financial system, the conclusion suggested by the compendium contributions is that they will continue to need more than financial services for there to be a sustained impact. The targeting strategy is therefore no longer an additional cost to financial service delivery, but value added to the successful delivery of services. The question remains as to who will bear this cost, and this will depend on external social and economic conditions, as much as micro-finance provider policy. The bottom line is that, ultimately, effectiveness has to be measured in terms of sustained impact of financial services on the livelihoods of the poor, including the poorest. The contributions to the compendium imply that this cannot be achieved by delivering financial services alone, however accurate the targeting strategy.
Endnotes
1The Coady International Institute was funded by the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) to work on this study in collaboration with the Consultative Group to Assist the Poorest: Working group on Poverty Yardsticks and Measurement Tools.
2CGAP with the Coady International Institute, 1998, How Micro-Finance Providers Target the Poor: A Compendium of Strategies, Antigonish, NS: Coady International Institute.
3Anthony Scoggins, personal communication, June 1999.
4Hashemi, 1997, notes that the hard-core poor "self-select" themselves out of the Grameen Bank schemes because "they are so destitute that they consider themselves not credit worthy" (p. 253).
5"Poorest of the poor" refers to those in the bottom 50% of those below the poverty line by CGAP's definition.
References
Accion International. (1998, Winter) What's so Important about Sustainability. Ventures, pp1-3.
Baydas, M., Graham, D. H., & Valenzuela, L. (1997). Commercial Banks in MicroFinance: New Actors in the Microfinance World. Bethesda, MD: Development Alternatives.
Dawson, J. (1999) Beyond credit: The role of complementary business development services in promoting innovation among small producers. Draft paper. Intermediate Technology Development Group
Dunford, C. (1998). Microfinance: A means to what end? Paper presented to the Global Dialogue on Microfinance and Human Development, 1-3 April, 1998, Stockholm, Sweden.
Friends of Women's World Banking, India. (1998). India's emerging federations of women's savings and credit groups. Unpublished manuscript.
Gulli, H. (1998). Micro-finance and poverty: Questioning conventional wisdom Washington, DC: Inter-American Development Bank.
Hashemi, S. M. (1997). Those left behind: A note on targeting the hardcore poor. In G. D. Wood & I. A. Sharif (Eds.), Who needs credit? Poverty and finance in Bangladesh. London: Zed Books.
Hulme, D., Mosley, P. (1996). Finance against poverty. London: Routledge.
Kantor, P. (1998). A gender critique of micro-enterprise development theories: The implications for a measure of microenterprise success. Paper presented at the Stitching Out of the Margin 2: Feminist Approaches to Economics/IAFFE Summer Conference, June 2-5, 1998, Amsterdam.
Mathie, A. (1998). Introduction. In CGAP with Coady International Institute, How micro-finance providers target the poor: A compendium of strategies. Antigonish, NS, Canada: Coady International Institute.
Mosley, P., & Hulme, D. (1998). Microenterprise finance: Is there a conflict between growth and poverty alleviation. World Development, 26(5), 783-790.
Otero, M. (1994). The evolution of nongovernmental organisations toward financial intermediation. In M. Otero & E. Rhyne (Eds.), The new world of microenterprise finance. West Hartford, Ct: Kumarian Press.
Ruttan, V. W. (1998). The new growth theory and development economics: A survey, Journal of Development Studies,35(2).
Seibel, H. D. (1998). Microfinance for the poor: Outreach v. institutional viability: Some observations (Working paper No. 1998-9). Cologne, Germany: University of Cologne, Development Research Center.
Seibel, H., & Parhusip, U. (1998). Attaining outreach with sustainability: A case study of a private micro-finance institution in Indonesia (Working paper No. 1998-7). Cologne, Germany: University of Cologne, Development Research Center.
Vogel, R. C., & Adams, D. W. (1997) Old and new paradigms in development finance. Savings and Development, 22(4), 361-378
GLOSSARY OF CONTRIBUTORS TO THE COMPENDIUM
AKRSP
Aga Khan Rural Support Programme, Pakistan
AIM
Amanah Ikhtiar Malaysia, Malaysia
ASA
Association for Rural Advancement, Bangladesh
BRAC
Bangladesh Rural Advancement Committee, Bangladesh
CAM
Centro de Apoyo a la Microempresa, El Salvador
CREDO
Christian Relief and Development Organization [multinational?]
CRS
Catholic Relief Services, [multinational?]
DECSI
Dedebit Credit and Savings Institution, Ethiopia
DID
Developpement International Desjardins, Mali
FINCA
Finca, Ecuador
FFH
Freedom from Hunger Foundation, Ghana
Grameen
Grameen Bank, Bangladesh
IPMF
Ibn Khaldoun People's Monetary Fund, Egypt
KMBI
Kabalikat Para Sa Maunlad Na Buhay, Inc., Philippines
Kalanjiam
Kalanjiam Foundation, India
KWFT
Kenya Women's Finance Trust, Kenya
MEDA
Mennonite Economic Development Associates, Nicaragua
NWTF
Negros Women for Tomorrow Foundation (Project Dungganon)
Nirdhan
Nirdhan, Nepal
Sanasa
SANASA, Sri Lanka
SC/USA
Save the Children, Palestine
SEF
Small Enterprise Foundation, South Africa
SHARE
Society for Helping and Awakening Poor through Education, India
Trickle-Up
Trickle-Up, Guatemala
TSPI
Tulay Sa Pag-Unlad, Inc., Philippines
Biographical Notes
Alison Mathie has taught at the Coady International Institute since 1997 in the areas of participatory approaches to development and gender analysis for policy and planning. She worked for 10 years overseas in West Africa and Melanesia in formal and non-formal education, and with women's organizations, and has since spent time in Melanesia, Asia, East Africa, and the USA conducting program evaluation and training in evaluation for the NGO sector. Her current overseas work includes training, program evaluation, and researching the potential of one approach outlined in this paper: asset-based community development. Publications include papers on participatory evaluation, mixing methods in evaluation, and a compendium of poverty targeting methodologies for the micro-finance sector.